telegram_public_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that it is read-only and that the posts mode is free (stars payment disabled), which is real value. However it omits auth requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, and return shape for a multi-mode 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by mode enumeration and a short billing caveat. No filler, though the payment sentence is terse and slightly abrupt.

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?

For a six-parameter, four-mode search with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and modes but leaves pagination (cursor), result limits, and return format unexplained. Adequate to invoke, not complete enough to predict behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for six undocumented parameters. It implies which parameter each mode uses (username for username mode, query for chats, tag for hashtag), which is helpful, but never explains limit bounds, cursor pagination, or the query vs username distinction explicitly.

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?

States a specific verb (Searches) and resource (public Telegram entities) and enumerates four concrete search modes that map to the mode enum. The 'public' qualifier distinguishes it from a private/account-scoped search like telegram_messages_search, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Describes what each mode targets but gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives against telegram_messages_search or telegram_chats_list. An agent can infer that this is the public-scope search tool, but selection is left to inference.

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