ads_telegram_ads_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does earn some credit for explicitly stating 'This is read-only', but it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, whether include_stats triggers extra network calls, pagination, or what happens when module_id is absent despite referencing 'the configured HTTP-based MCP module'.

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 short sentences with the resource named first and the read-only constraint front-loaded. The clause 'through the configured HTTP-based MCP module' is vague filler that does not help an agent decide or invoke, but the text is far from bloated.

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 six undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is not sufficient for correct invocation. The agent cannot infer what max_ads bounds, what the two tool-name parameters point to, or what shape the returned metrics take.

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?

Six parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them. Cryptic parameters like list_tool, stats_tool, module_id, and include_stats are left entirely undefined, and the enum values for stats_period (5min/day) are never discussed.

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 names a specific verb (Read) and resource (Telegram Ads account, campaigns, normalized metrics), so the core purpose is clear. However it never distinguishes itself from the nearby siblings ads_telegram_ads_api_report, ads_telegram_ads_sync, or ads_telegram_accounts_report, leaving the agent to guess which report variant is intended.

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 when-to-use guidance is given: there is no statement of when this should be chosen over ads_telegram_ads_api_report or ads_telegram_ads_sync, no prerequisite conditions, and no exclusions. The only hint is the implied read-only nature, which is not framed as a selection rule.

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