telegram-vote-poll

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds the key behavior that an empty array retracts a vote, which is not obvious from annotations. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as voting restrictions, persistence, or whether multiple votes are allowed.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action. Every word is informative, with no wasted 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?

For a simple mutation tool with no output schema and three well-described parameters, the description covers the essential functionality and the retraction special case. It could mention prerequisites like the poll must be active, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to understand usage.

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 the description adds marginal value. It echoes the schema's description for optionIndexes regarding retraction. No new semantics are provided for chatId or messageId beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 votes in a poll by option index, covering single/multi-choice and retraction. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like telegram-create-poll and telegram-close-poll, but does not explicitly differentiate from telegram-press-button or other interactive actions.

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. It implicitly suggests usage for voting, but lacks when-not-to-use or comparison to similar tools like telegram-press-button or telegram-send-reaction.

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