dm_message_edit

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the platform limitation and the requirement for at least one parameter. It does not contradict 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, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return values, but that is acceptable. It covers purpose, usage, and parameters adequately. Minor gap: does not state what happens on error (e.g., if message not found), but overall complete for its 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that reply_markup can be passed an empty object {} to clear the keyboard, and that body can be new text or caption. It also notes the mutual exclusivity/requirement of body and reply_markup.

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 edits a previously-sent outbound message, with a specific verb ('Edit') and resource ('message'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting the platform limitation (Telegram only), which is not present in other dm_* tools.

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?

It explicitly states when to use (Telegram only) and when not to use (not for Facebook/Instagram). It provides a usage requirement: at least one of body or reply_markup must be provided. However, it does not mention alternative tools (e.g., dm_message_send for new messages), which would have made it a 5.

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