inline_query

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns a list of results, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or the temporary nature of inline query results, leaving some ambiguity given the non-read-only hint.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action ('make an inline query'), and contains no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool is relatively simple and has an output schema, so return values are partly covered. However, the description omits parameter details and usage guidance, leaving limit and offset unexplained. It is minimally viable but has clear 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It clarifies 'bot' and 'query' through the '@bot query' example, but 'limit' and 'offset' are not explained, leaving them undocumented in both schema and description. Only partial compensation.

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 performs an inline query to a bot, analogous to typing '@bot query' in any chat, and returns the results. This is a specific verb+resource action that distinguishes it from siblings like click_inline_button or send_message.

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 gives a clear context (inline query in any chat) but does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives, nor provides prerequisites or exclusions. The usage is implied by the action itself but not directly guided.

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