telegram-edit-folder

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description mainly adds the partial-update behavior. No further side effects, permissions, or return info are disclosed, which is acceptable given annotation coverage.

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?

Single sentence with a clarifying fragment, perfectly concise and front-loaded with the key action. Every word adds value.

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?

Despite moderate complexity (14 parameters), the description gives minimal contextual information. No details about effects, errors, or behavior after editing. Without an output schema, more context is warranted.

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 only 43%, and the tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond 'only pass fields to change'. For a mutation with many parameters, more guidance would help.

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 clearly states the action ('Edit') and the resource ('existing Telegram chat folder'), and references how to obtain the ID ('from telegram-get-chat-folders'), distinguishing it from related tools like create, delete, and reorder.

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?

Explicitly says to pass only fields to change and that omitted fields retain values, which guides usage. However, it does not state when not to use (e.g., creation) or explicitly compare to alternatives.

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