telegram-get-discussion-message

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and description does not contradict. Adds value by listing return fields (discussionGroupId, discussionMsgId, etc.) and hints at non-destructive workflow. No additional behavioral gaps.

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. First sentence efficiently lists returned fields. Second sentence adds actionable usage guidance. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with essential information.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing all return fields. Also explains the workflow and connection to other tools. Parameter documentation is complete. Sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 descriptions already clearly define chatId and messageId with 100% coverage. Description reinforces the purpose of parameters but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema. 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 returns discussion group info for a channel post with comments enabled, listing specific fields. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the return data structure and linking to telegram-send-message for workflow.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: for channel posts with comments enabled. Includes a use case example (using returned IDs with telegram-send-message). Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but gives sufficient guidance.

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