telegram_onboarding_verify

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the safety/side-effect burden. It does disclose that chat_id confirmation is required and that a test message may be sent, which is useful. But it omits whether existing configs are overwritten, whether the setup code is consumed, or what happens on failed verification.

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?

Single sentence with front-loaded verb and a concise list of outcomes. Every clause adds information, with no filler or repetition.

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?

This is a complex multi-step tool with 9 parameters and no output schema. The description lacks prerequisites, return values, and details of the confirmation flow, so an agent cannot fully anticipate side effects 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?

The description maps several parameters indirectly (setupCode, chat_id confirmation, test message, MCP config) but leaves 'limit' unexplained and never explicitly ties botToken/serverName/packageName to their roles. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description only partially compensates.

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 opens with the specific action 'Verify setup code in Telegram updates' and lists concrete outputs (MCP config, test message). It is clear about the tool's resource and outcome, though it does not explicitly contrast with 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 this is the verification/finalization step after receiving a setup code, and it mentions key sub-steps. However, it never states when to use this tool versus telegram_onboarding_prepare or send_telegram_notification, nor any preconditions like needing a bot token.

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