List Telegram chats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the session scope ('visible to the logged-in session'), the returned fields, and the matching semantics of the filter. It does not mention authentication prerequisites, pagination, or result limits, which are minor gaps for a read-only listing tool.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed by the usage purpose and the optional filter. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description supplies the return field set, the session scoping, and the routing purpose, which is everything an agent needs to call and consume this single-optional-parameter listing tool.

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 parameter is already fully documented. The description's note that `filter` does a case-insensitive substring match on name/username/id largely restates the schema, adding no new syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (List) and resource (Telegram dialogs/chats/channels/groups/users) scoped to the logged-in session, and even previews the return shape [{id, type, name, username}]. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like tg_messages and tg_download, which it names as downstream consumers.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it ('Use it to find the chat id or @username to pass as `chat` to tg_messages / tg_download'), which routes the agent correctly. There is no explicit when-not or negative case, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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