telegram-send-story

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write) and openWorldHint=true (dynamic). The description adds behavioral details: privacy settings, requirement of allowUserIds for 'selected', and the limitation that MediaAreas are not supported. This adds value beyond annotations, though it could mention side effects like story visibility.

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 with no wasted words. First sentence states the core purpose; second adds privacy hint and limitation. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers media types, privacy options, and a limitation. It does not describe return behavior (e.g., success response or story ID), but overall it is fairly complete given the tool's complexity and existing schema documentation.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats the allowUserIds constraint already in the schema (required when privacy='selected'). No additional parameter meaning is provided beyond what's in the schema, hence score 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?

The description clearly states the action (publish), resource (story, photo/video), and target (profile or channel). It distinguishes from siblings like edit-story or delete-stories by focusing on publication. Specific privacy options are listed, and a limitation (MediaAreas not supported) is noted, 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 implies usage context (publishing stories) but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like send-message or send-file. Given that it's the only story publication tool among siblings, the context is clear. However, explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance is missing.

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