telegram-search-chats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds the return context (description and member count). However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination, sorting, or any limitations. The added value is modest.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and return info. Every word is necessary and there is no fluff.

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 adequately states the return fields (description and member count). However, it could mention additional fields like chat ID or type for completeness, making it slightly above average but not perfect.

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%, and the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema fields. It confirms that query is for name/username and limit controls max results, but doesn't provide format details or examples. 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 searches for Telegram chats, users, or channels by name or username, and specifies the return fields (description and member count). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like telegram-list-chats (lists all chats) and telegram-search-global (broader search).

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 implies usage for finding specific chats/users/channels by name or username, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like telegram-list-chats or telegram-search-messages. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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