tgtrack_set_report_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It only lists settings without disclosing side effects, permissions, or safety. The tool likely performs a write operation, but this is not stated.

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 a single short sentence, front-loaded with key information. It earns its place by summarizing the tool's purpose efficiently, though it could be structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and low schema documentation, the description fails to explain return values, error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., chatID must exist), or the exact effect of each setting. A tool that modifies settings should provide more comprehensive context.

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 description adds context for three boolean parameters (morning report → sendMorningReport, if no subs → sendIfNoSubs, traffic reports → sendTrafficReport), but chatID is not explained. With only 25% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves gaps.

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 states 'Channel daily report settings (morning report, if no subscriptions, traffic reports)', clearly indicating the tool configures report settings for a channel. It distinguishes from sibling tools that set other channel properties like auto-approve or link names.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned. Siblings include other set tools but no differentiation is provided.

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