telegram_edit_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing mutation behavior. It merely says 'edit' without stating that the original message is overwritten, that a 'Edited' marker appears, or any permissions/error conditions. This lacks transparency for a mutating operation.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to purpose and usage.

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?

The tool is simple, but completeness is limited by missing behavioral transparency, no return value/error details, and the undocumented parseMode parameter. It covers the core purpose and usage, but an agent is left without context for edge cases or expected results.

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 coverage is 67% (text and messageId have descriptions, but parseMode does not). The tool description does not add meaning beyond repeating 'message_id' and provides no clarification for parseMode, leaving a gap for one parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Edit') and resource ('previously sent Telegram message') with the method ('by its message_id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that send new messages or handle onboarding.

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?

Provides a clear usage context ('Use to replace the ACK with a final response') that implies this tool is for editing after an initial acknowledgment. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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