leave_chat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation mutates state ('leave' or 'delete'), but does not mention irreversibility, permissions required, effects on messages, or what happens to the dialog after deletion. This is minimal disclosure for a destructive-looking operation.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. The core action and resource types are front-loaded, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and a single undocumented required parameter, the description is too thin. It does not explain how to identify the chat, what side effects occur, or how the operation differs for private dialogs versus groups/channels. An agent would likely need external knowledge or trial and error to call it correctly.

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?

The schema has one required parameter, 'chat', with 0% description coverage in the schema, and the tool description adds no explanation of what 'chat' should be (ID, username, URL, etc.). The description fails to compensate for the schema gap, leaving the agent to guess the parameter format and semantics.

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 states a specific action ('Leave'/'delete') applied to clear resources ('group/channel' and 'private dialog'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like join_chat, create_group, and get_participants. An agent can immediately understand what the tool does without needing additional context.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as join_chat, delete_messages, or chat_info. There are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and the sibling list.

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