telegram_get_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states two important behaviors: messages are returned 'newest first' (ordering) and are 'without marking them read' (side effect). This is valuable context beyond the input schema. However, it does not mention other behaviors like pagination mechanics or error handling.

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 12-word sentence that packs purpose, ordering, and side effect without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters and an output schema, the description provides core information but lacks details on pagination (before_message_id), limit semantics, and prerequisites (e.g., chat must be allowed). It is adequate for basic understanding but incomplete for advanced usage. The output schema covers return structure, so that gap is partially filled.

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 should compensate by explaining parameters. It does not. The description only says 'Read messages from one allowed chat' without referencing chat_id, limit, or before_message_id. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but no added semantics like how to paginate using before_message_id are provided.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Read messages', the resource 'from one allowed chat', and two key traits: 'newest first' and 'without marking them read'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like telegram_list_chats which lists chats, and telegram_search_messages which searches across chats.

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?

The description implies usage for reading messages from a specific chat without marking them as read, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like telegram_search_messages or telegram_get_message_context. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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