telegram_onboarding_prepare

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool prepares instructions and auto-generates config but doesn't say whether this is a read/write operation, what inputs it consumes, what outputs the agent can expect, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a setup tool.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the purpose and front-loaded with the key action.

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 that this tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too minimal. It fails to explain return values, parameter usage, or usage context, making it incomplete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the four parameters (botToken, setupCode, serverName, packageName). It adds no meaning beyond the schema's raw property names, so the agent gets no help in understanding what each parameter should contain.

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 clearly states the tool prepares onboarding instructions to link a Telegram bot and auto-generate MCP config. It names a specific verb and resource, and the outcome is clear. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like telegram_onboarding_verify, but the distinct action of 'preparing' vs 'verifying' is lightly implied.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. No prerequisites, sequencing, or alternatives are mentioned, leaving the agent without context on when this step is appropriate.

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