telegram_agent_unenroll

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

With no annotations and no behavioral detail, the description provides only the surface-level intent. It does not disclose whether stopping is reversible, what state changes occur, whether it is idempotent, or what errors might be expected.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, using a single clear sentence with no redundant or extraneous content.

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 the tool is simple, the description omits essential context such as how chat_id should be obtained, what 'agentic handling' entails, and what the expected result of stopping it is. The minimal text leaves too much to inference.

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 only parameter, chat_id, has zero schema description and is not explained in the tool description. The agent is left to infer its meaning and format, which is insufficient for reliable invocation.

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 action ('Stop') and the resource ('agentic handling for a chat'), making the tool's basic purpose easy to identify. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling telegram_agent_enroll, but the inverse relationship is apparent.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as telegram_agent_enroll or telegram_agent_set_scenario. The description only restates the action without explaining context, prerequisites, or consequences.

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