tg_edit

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses the ownership restriction but omits side effects (e.g., old text is overwritten, 'edited' marker), permission requirements, and failure conditions for editing messages.

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 sentence with no redundant words and the core information is front-loaded. The brevity is appropriate for a simple tool and every word contributes meaning.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered, but the lack of parameter documentation and behavioral context makes the tool only partially complete. For a simple three-parameter edit, the minimal description plus schema is nearly usable, but missing edge-case behavior prevents full completeness.

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% and the description does not explain the parameters. The phrase 'one of your own sent messages' hints that message_id refers to an existing message and text is the new content, but chat format, message_id semantics, and text constraints are left undefined.

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 states the action precisely: edit an existing message that the user sent. The phrase 'one of your own sent messages' differentiates it from sending new messages (tg_send) and from editing other entities like topics, chats, or bot messages.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only implies the message must be an existing one the user sent, but does not mention tg_send for new messages or when tg_edit should not be used.

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