telegram_download_file

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the 20 MB Bot API ceiling and that the call produces a local file path. Annotations only mark it non-readOnly/openWorld; the description supplies the practical constraint that determines success or failure. It doesn't say where the file lands or how failures/oversized files surface.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, leading with the action and ending with the return value. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and a 20 MB limit disclosed, the description covers what an agent needs to invoke the tool and interpret the result. Only edge-case behavior (oversized file, missing file_id) is left implicit.

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% and the sole parameter already says 'file_id from an incoming message'. The description repeats the parameter name and constraint but adds no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Download a file from Telegram by file_id') and implies the returned artifact ('its local path'). It is clearly distinguishable from the send_* siblings, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 tool is single-purpose enough that when-to-use is obvious from the name and from the fact that all siblings are send/kill/health tools. There is no explicit statement about when not to use it or what alternative to pick for oversized files.

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