tg_notify

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

Annotations already cover idempotency and non-read-only status, and the description adds useful behavioral detail: no arguments reports defaults, 'exceptions' lists chats with differing settings, and 'hours' changes silence from indefinite to time-limited. It does not describe return format, but the annotations reduce the burden on the description.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then organized by usage context and an Args section. Despite being long, every sentence earns its place because it supplies meaning the schema lacks.

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?

The description covers all parameter semantics, the no-argument default behavior, and how this tool relates to tg_mute. It leaves minor gaps around parameter interactions (e.g., whether chat and scope can be combined) and exact return shapes, but overall it gives an agent enough to use the tool correctly.

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 fully compensates by explaining every parameter with concrete meaning: mute, hours, sound, previews, stories, scope, chat, and exceptions. This goes well beyond the bare types in 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?

The description opens with 'Read or change notification settings — for one chat or a whole category', stating a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also differentiates itself from tg_mute by explaining that tg_mute is the shortcut for silencing one chat while tg_notify handles everything else.

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 explicitly names tg_mute as the alternative and gives clear conditions for choosing this tool: 'turning a whole category off, controlling sound, message previews and story notifications, and finding chats whose settings differ from the default.' It also explains the no-arguments case for reading account defaults.

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