get_participants

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully discloses that Telegram does not return participants completely for large channels, which is valuable context. However, it does not mention pagination, required authentication, rate limits, or any other operational behaviors.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the query parameter is explained, and the Telegram limitation is stated in an efficient way.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values need no extra explanation. The main gaps are the lack of semantics for chat and limit, and the absence of guidance on pagination or large-channel behavior beyond the stated limitation. The description is adequate but not fully complete for autonomous agent invocation.

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. It explains the query parameter as a filter by name/@username, which adds real meaning beyond the schema. However, chat and limit parameters are not semantically explained; chat is only implied by 'group/channel' and limit is left to the schema default.

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 identifies the resource as participants of a group/channel and the operation as retrieving them. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_chat and get_contacts by focusing on group/channel membership, but it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 the tool is for fetching group/channel participants and mentions a query filter, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like get_chat, get_contacts, or search_public. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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