telegram-send-album

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

The description discloses that media type is auto-detected, uploads are serial per item with time estimates, and videos are not fully tested. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) which only indicate mutation and external interaction.

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 four sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently includes caveats and performance advice without superfluous text.

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 the tool's complexity (6 params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, constraints, behavior, and usage advice. It lacks error handling details or return values, but these are partially compensable by the good schema and annotations.

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 documentation coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes parameters. The description adds value by noting auto-detection of media type and performance characteristics, which are not in the schema. However, it does not elaborate on each parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb 'Send', the resource 'album', and specifies it is for a group of 2-10 photos as a single grouped message. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like telegram-send-message or telegram-send-file which handle single items.

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 advises on when to use this tool (for albums) and provides context: prefer ≤5 items for low latency, avoid videos until tested. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings but gives practical usage recommendations.

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