crm_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether this is a read or write operation, whether it has side effects, what permissions are needed, or what happens if inputs are invalid. The phrase 'Resolve...context' hints at a lookup but is not explicit.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. It contains no extraneous information.

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 2 optional parameters, no annotations, and a clear sibling set, the description is insufficient. It does not explain parameter semantics, behavioral traits, or how this tool differs from related tools. An output schema exists but the description does not hint at what it returns.

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 explain what the two parameters ('group_id' and 'username') represent. It does not describe either parameter's meaning beyond the schema titles. However, the tool name and purpose strongly imply these are identifiers for a Telegram group and user, so the gap is partially mitigated by context. Baseline 3 is appropriate given no param descriptions.

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 uses the verb 'Resolve' and specifies the resource 'Booking CRM context' with 'linked Telegram group and topic keys'. This gives a general sense of the tool's purpose, but 'Resolve' is somewhat vague and does not clearly differentiate the tool from siblings like 'crm_process' or 'workers_memory_get'. The purpose is adequate but not sharp.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the sibling list includes 'crm_process' and several 'workers_memory' tools that could relate to CRM context, the lack of usage context or exclusions is a significant gap.

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