Check Telegram Ads API readiness and, with probe set, run a read-only account request to verify access while keeping provider writes guarded.
Show the official Telegram Ads API layer readiness. With probe=true, perform one read-only getCurrentAccount request; provider writes remain separately guarded.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| probe | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that probe=true performs one read-only getCurrentAccount request and that provider writes are separately guarded, but it omits auth requirements, rate limits, failure behavior, and what 'readiness' actually verifies.
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 purpose and then probe behavior. There is no filler and every sentence adds useful information.
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 status tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented single parameter, the description covers purpose and probe side effects reasonably. However, it leaves the meaning of the readiness result undefined and does not mention authentication or return-shape expectations.
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 schema has one boolean parameter with 0% description coverage, but the description explains that probe=true triggers a read-only getCurrentAccount request. This substantially clarifies the parameter's effect, though it does not explicitly state the default or probe=false behavior.
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 ('Show') and resource ('official Telegram Ads API layer readiness'). It also distinguishes itself from write-oriented siblings by saying provider writes are separately guarded, though it does not name those sibling 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 implies usage: call it to check API readiness, and optionally set probe=true to perform a live read-only request. It does not explicitly say when to use probe versus not, or when to prefer this status tool over related Telegram Ads API tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.