telegram-edit-story

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) with external side effects (openWorldHint=true). The description does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., notifications, permanent changes, media constraints) that would aid the agent.

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 listing three actions, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise, readable, and avoids unnecessary words. The parenthetical clarifies caption clearing behavior efficiently.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, annotations present), the description covers high-level capabilities but lacks details on conditional requirements (e.g., allowUserIds needed when privacy='selected') and parameter interactions. It is adequate for basic understanding but not fully complete.

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 100%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by grouping operations: 'replace media' (implicitly references filePath and type), 'update caption ('' clears it)' (explicitly explains special behavior), 'change privacy rules' (references privacy). This contextual grouping helps the agent understand parameter interactions.

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'), the resource ('an existing story'), and specific operations ('replace media, update caption, or change privacy rules'). It distinguishes from siblings like telegram-send-story (create) and telegram-delete-stories (delete).

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., telegram-send-story for new stories, telegram-delete-stories for removal). It lacks prerequisites or exclusion criteria, though the tool's purpose is self-evident.

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