Translate a message or a string

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that translation is delegated to Telegram's own service, but says nothing about failure modes, unsupported-language behavior, or whether the source language is auto-detected.

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, no filler, with the primary purpose front-loaded and the two invocation modes immediately after. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, this covers purpose, both call paths, and the language parameter adequately. The remaining gaps (neither-mode behavior, unknown source language handling) are minor for an operation of this complexity.

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 carries the param burden and does it well: it explains that chat and messageId combine, text is the literal-string alternative, and targetLang is an ISO code with examples ('id', 'en'). It does not clarify the mutual exclusivity or the length constraints from the schema.

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 (Translate) and resource (text/message) and names the backing service (Telegram's own translation service). No sibling tool does translation, and the two operating modes are spelled out so an agent can immediately tell what this does.

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?

Explicitly routes the caller: 'chat+messageId to translate an existing message, or text to translate a literal string.' This is clear conditional guidance for both modes. It stops short of stating what happens if both/neither are supplied, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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