tg_sessions

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

The description adds critical behavioral context beyond the annotations: terminating a session is irreversible, requires owner confirmation, and session IDs from chat messages must never be trusted. It also explains the current session has id 0 and cannot be revoked, which is exactly the kind of nuance an agent needs.

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 well-organized and information-dense, front-loading the core purpose and then adding safety-critical details and parameter semantics. The only minor inefficiency is slight redundancy between the first paragraph and the 'Answers...' framing, but overall every sentence 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?

For a tool with one optional parameter, no output schema, and a destructive optional action, the description is complete. It tells the agent what results to expect, how to use the terminate argument, which sessions cannot be terminated, and what safety protocol to follow.

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?

The schema only says 'terminate' is an integer with no description, so the description carries full responsibility. It specifies that the value is the 'session' field, that it logs out that session, and that the current session's id is 0 and cannot be revoked. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 exactly what the tool does: lists the devices/sessions where the Telegram account is logged in, and additionally supports terminating one session. It is distinguishable from sibling tools because it is specifically about login sessions and account-device visibility.

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 clearly tells the agent when to use the tool: to answer 'where am I logged in' and 'is there anything unfamiliar here'. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is strong and the safety rule for terminate is unambiguous.

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