telegram_get_message_context

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but does not disclose auth requirements, rate limits, or whether the returned order is guaranteed. The existence of an output schema mitigates some concerns, but the description adds minimal transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. While brief, it is front-loaded and not verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and a moderate output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain parameter meanings or provide usage context, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain any parameter. 'Target message' hints at message_id, and 'nearby messages' hints at after/before, but no semantics or default behaviors are provided. Parameters remain opaque.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool reads a target message with nearby messages in chronological order, distinguishing it from sibling tools like telegram_get_messages (likely returns messages without context) and telegram_search_messages. However, it could explicitly mention parameters (after, before) that define 'nearby'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as telegram_get_messages or telegram_search_messages. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or alternative tools, leaving the agent without decision context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.