telegram-send-dice

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false) indicate mutation, and description adds that the action triggers a server-side dice roll and returns the value. Lists value ranges per emoji, which is behavioral detail not in 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?

Two sentences: first states the action, second provides value ranges and use cases. No wasted words, front-loaded with purpose.

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?

Covers main action, return value, and parameter choices. Could mention that it sends a message (implied) or chat type restrictions, but with openWorldHint and no output schema, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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 50%, and description adds meaning by explaining emoji values and ranges. However, other parameters (replyTo, topicId) have no extra info, relying on schema documentation. The description partially compensates for the gap.

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 (send animated dice/game emoji) and the result (returns server-rolled value). Unambiguously differentiates from sibling tools like send-message or send-sticker by specifying the dice/game aspect.

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?

Explicitly states the tool is for games, coin-flips, random picks, providing clear use context. Does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the given context is sufficient for appropriate selection.

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