send_album

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

The description discloses that the caption is applied only to the first media item, which is non-obvious and not covered by annotations. It also states the size limit of 2-10 items, adding behavioral context beyond the basic annotation flags.

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; the first states the core purpose, the second adds a crucial behavioral detail. No redundant or unnecessary 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?

With 5 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description covers only album size and caption behavior. It lacks guidance on chat identifier format, file path requirements, and other parameters, making it insufficient for correct invocation in many scenarios.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the chat, file_paths, silent, or reply_to parameters. It only clarifies caption placement, leaving most parameter semantics undefined and forcing the agent to infer from types alone.

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 'Send an album of 2-10 photos/videos as one group', specifying the verb, resource, and constraints. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_message and send_file which handle single media/text.

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 implies usage when sending 2-10 media files as a group, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. The caption note adds context but no direct guidance on tool selection.

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