telegram_file_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses key traits: read-only operation, bounded content reads at 256 KB, base64 content format, and rejection of arbitrary paths or URLs. It does not cover authentication requirements, error behavior, or return structure, which keeps it below a 5.

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 four short sentences and front-loads the core purpose, identifier constraint, byte bound, and read-only nature. Every sentence adds relevant information with no wasted text.

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 has three parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, so the description should be relatively complete. It covers the essential input constraints and read-only behavior but omits return format details, optional-parameter behavior, and error handling, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent invoking it without other structured guidance.

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%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It explains file_id as an int32 decimal string and distinguishes metadata from bounded base64 content, and it states the 262144-byte maximum, but it does not explain max_bytes by name or clarify whether it applies only to content mode.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it retrieves metadata or bounded base64 content for a Telegram file by file_id. It clearly distinguishes the two modes and the accepted identifier type, so an agent can understand the tool's function without reading the schema.

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 through 'by file_id' and 'Accepts ONLY Telegram file_id', and it explicitly forbids file paths or URLs. However, it does not state when to choose this tool versus alternatives or describe prerequisites, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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