tg_download

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. It only mentions the default destination directory, but omits critical details like whether files are overwritten, what happens if no media exists, or any filesystem side effects. The tool writes to disk, so more disclosure is expected.

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 short sentences with no redundant information. Front-loaded with the tool's purpose, then the default destination. 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's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no annotations) and presence of an output schema, the description is too thin. It lacks context on expected behaviors like error cases, file handling, or prerequisites. The output schema covers return values, but important usage context is missing.

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 description must compensate. It only hints at the 'dest' parameter via the default path, but does not explain 'chat' or 'message_id' formats, or that 'dest' is optional. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds little semantic value.

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 a specific verb ('Download') and resource ('media attached to one message'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like tg_download_many (plural) and tg_media. The scope 'one message' is explicit and matches the parameter names.

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?

Usage is implied: this tool is for downloading media from a single message, contrasting with tg_download_many. However, there is no explicit 'use when' or 'when not to use' guidance, nor mention of alternatives or prerequisites.

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