ads_telegram_accounts_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add useful behavior: cabinet switching requires confirm=true and is restored afterward. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only, what permissions are needed, what 'read' returns, or any rate limits, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary list action followed by the confirm/restore caveat. There is little waste, though the second sentence could be clearer about what 'read' entails.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is too thin. It omits parameter explanations, return behavior, and permission or safety context, which an agent needs to invoke it reliably.

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% across 7 parameters. The description only gives meaning to confirm and vaguely to all/account_id via 'one or all'; it says nothing about module_id, max_ads, stats_period, or include_stats, so most parameters remain undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: list Telegram Ads cabinets and optionally read one or all. An agent can understand the tool lists cabinets, but the description does not distinguish it from close siblings such as ads_telegram_ads_report or ads_telegram_accounts_sync, leaving ambiguity about which report-like tool to pick.

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 phrase 'optionally read one or all cabinets' hints at usage patterns and the confirm requirement is a conditional rule, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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