Mute / unmute chat

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

Annotations already declare destructive/mutating behavior (readOnlyHint=false) and open-world reach, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the days=0 unmute semantics and notes a default mute behaviour, but "default mute behaviour" is left undefined and no auth or return behavior is given.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and duration, with the unmute case stated immediately after. No wasted words.

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 simple 2-param mutation tool with no output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly adequate. The remaining gaps are the undefined "default mute behaviour" and the unspecified format of the `chat` argument.

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 coverage is 0%, so the schema supplies only types/default/range with no prose. The description meaningfully defines days (N days, 0=unmute), which is real added value, but it says nothing about the required `chat` parameter (ID vs. username format), leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb ("Mute") plus resource ("a chat") and a duration parameter, and explicitly folds the inverse operation ("0 = unmute") into the purpose. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like telegram_archive_chat or telegram_pin_chat without opening any schema.

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?

It tells the agent that days=0 unmutes, which is useful within-tool routing, but gives no guidance on when to choose this over alternatives or on prerequisites/context. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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