telegram-get-chat-info

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description aligning with 'Get' is consistent but adds no new behavioral context. It does not disclose potential errors, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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, directly states the tool's purpose and key information returned. No extraneous words, clearly front-loaded.

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 simple read tool with one param and annotations providing safety info, the description covers the main outputs. However, without an output schema, listing a few fields is helpful but leaves uncertainty about the full response structure.

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% for the single parameter chatId, with a clear description ('Chat ID or username'). The tool description does not add additional meaning or format details beyond 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 clearly identifies the action ('Get') and the resource ('detailed info about a Telegram chat'), and lists specific fields (name, type, members, description, forum status), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-chat-members or get-profile.

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. The description implies it is for general chat info, but it does not mention when not to use it or reference other tools for more specific data (e.g., get-chat-members for member details).

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