click_inline_button

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

The description adds constraints beyond the annotations, such as requiring exact text match and the XOR relationship between button_text and button_index. However, it does not disclose the side effects or outcomes of clicking the button, though annotations already indicate the operation is not idempotent and not read-only.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a minimal arg list. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or filler content. It is properly front-loaded with the main action.

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?

The description covers the essential behavior and parameter constraints for the tool. Given the existence of an output schema and annotations, it does not need to explain return values or safety. It could be improved by clarifying the roles of chat and message_id, but those are reasonably inferable from the summary.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the meaning and constraints of button_text and button_index, including the flat-index interpretation and the requirement to pass exactly one of them. It does not explain chat and message_id, but those are standard parameters whose purpose is clear from their names and the tool context.

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 'Нажать inline-кнопку под сообщением бота' (click an inline button under a bot message), specifying both the verb and the target resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings by focusing on inline button interaction, which is unique among the provided tools.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or conditions. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and summary, leaving the agent to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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