telegram_send_message

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only (sends) and not destructive. The description adds details about formatting support and reply functionality, but does not disclose potential limitations like rate limits or required permissions.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action. It includes a brief list of parameters and return value, which is helpful without being verbose.

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 the complexity (5 parameters, output exists), the description covers key features like formatting and replying. Annotations provide safety context, and the output schema is mentioned. Some details like message length limits are left to the schema, which is acceptable.

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 input schema itself has high description coverage (all parameters described). The description adds contextual meaning by noting 'Supports plain text, Markdown, and HTML formatting' and 'Can reply to an existing message using reply_to_message_id,' which enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Send a text message to a Telegram chat,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., send_photo, send_audio) by focusing on text messages.

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 for text messages but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are given.

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