Telegram session status

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool never errors and returns {logged_in:false, hint} when missing, covering error handling and output format. However, it omits details about side effects or performance, but these are minimal for a status check.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second adds usage guidance and behavior. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 parameters, no output schema, and low complexity, the description covers purpose, usage, and behavior. It lacks explanation of what 'hint' contains or what 'usable' means, but these are minor gaps.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100% and the description need not add parameter info. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the description adds no parameter details but doesn't need to.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('local tdl Telegram session'), clearly stating its function to verify login status. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being a diagnostic tool to call before other tg_* tools, though not explicitly mentioning what it doesn't do.

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 advises calling this tool first if another tg_* tool fails or before starting Telegram work, providing clear context for when to use it. No alternatives are needed given its singular purpose.

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