telegram-press-button

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

The description discloses that the tool is a write operation (presses buttons), which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=false). It adds behavioral context about rejected button types and the return format, going beyond what annotations provide.

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 two sentences, efficient and well-structured. The first sentence front-loads the core action, the second covers constraints and return value, with no wasted words.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully explains the return value and constraints (rejected button types). It covers both invocation methods and provides enough context for the 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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds moderate value by explaining that row/column are 0-based and that data is an escape hatch. This clarifies usage but does not significantly enhance understanding 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 states it presses an inline keyboard callback button on a message, differentiating it from sibling tools like telegram-get-message-buttons. It specifies the verb 'press' and the resource 'inline keyboard callback button', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains two methods (row/column or raw base64) and notes that URL, switch-inline, game, and 2FA-password buttons are rejected, providing clear when-not guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives among siblings, so it lacks full usage context.

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