telegram-set-chat-permissions

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds useful context: omitted flags keep current state, true=allowed, false=denied. However, no mention of authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects like irreversible changes.

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 unnecessary words. Front-loaded with purpose, then clarifies flag behavior. Every sentence adds value.

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 mutation nature and absence of output schema, the description could mention expected return (e.g., success flag) or irreversible consequences. It is adequate but lacks some completeness.

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% with descriptive names and short descriptions. The description adds a key behavioral note about omitted flags preserving state, but does not provide deeper parameter semantics 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 the verb 'set' and the resource 'default permissions for all non-admin members of a group, supergroup, or channel.' It specifies the scope and distinguishes from many sibling tools like ban, mute, or admin settings.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like telegram-set-admin or individual permission toggles. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide examples.

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