telegram-get-contact-requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it shows message previews, but doesn't contradict annotations. It provides minor extra context beyond annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and function. No wasted words, perfectly sized for the complexity.

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 single-parameter read tool with good annotations and schema coverage, the description is adequate. It explains what is returned (messages from non-contacts with preview). Lacks details on pagination or empty results, but sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage for the 'limit' parameter with a description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-specific information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves incoming messages from non-contacts (contact requests) and previews them. It uses specific verb 'get' and resource 'contact requests', distinguishing it from sibling tools like telegram-get-updates.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is stated, the purpose is specific enough that an agent can infer this is for viewing messages from non-contacts. No alternatives are named, but the context is clear.

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