Download Telegram media from a chat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It explains the tool returns absolute paths of newly downloaded files and skips already-present files (--skip-same). This addresses key behaviors, though it omits permissions, rate limits, or error handling.

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 two sentences: first states the core action and return value, second gives parameter usage hints. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence adds necessary information without waste.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main purpose, return value, parameter behaviors, and skip-same behavior. It does not address prerequisites (e.g., authentication) or error scenarios, but it is largely complete for typical use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema: provides examples for extensions ('xlsx,pdf'), explains since_id as 'everything new after message X', and clarifies last_n as 'latest N media messages' with default 100. This enriches parameter understanding.

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 downloads media files from a single chat to a local directory and returns paths of newly downloaded files. It specifies the resource (media files from one chat) and the action (download), distinguishing it from siblings like tg_download_url (URL downloads) and tg_chats (chat listing).

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 provides usage guidance for parameters (extensions, since_id, last_n) and notes default behavior (last_n default 100) and skip-same behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings (e.g., tg_download_url for URL downloads, tg_messages for text), limiting differentiation.

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