telegram-pin-message

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

Description states the action but does not reveal behavioral traits beyond what annotations already indicate. Annotations show readOnlyHint=false (write operation), but description lacks details like notification effects, permission requirements, or whether pinning replaces an existing pin. No contradiction with 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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded and immediately clear. Perfectly concise for a simple action.

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-action tool, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details about side effects (e.g., limits on pins per chat) and return behavior. Given the presence of an output schema and sibling tools, some additional context would improve completeness.

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 the schema itself provides parameter descriptions for all three fields. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Since coverage is high, the baseline score is 3.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('pin') and the resource ('a message in a Telegram chat'), directly matching the tool name. It distinguishes from siblings like 'telegram-unpin-message' and 'telegram-pin-chat', which serve different purposes.

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?

Description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., admin rights), when not to use (e.g., already pinned message), or comparison to similar tools like 'telegram-pin-chat'.

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