Post Details

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint=false, which would otherwise look like a write operation; the description resolves this by explaining it is a read-like POST that does not publish to social platforms, and adds that it consumes paid API credits and needs confirm=true. This is exactly the extra context the annotations cannot convey.

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 short paragraphs, front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by access limits and the credit/confirm mechanics. Nearly every sentence earns its place, though the closing sentence is slightly redundant with the caching text already in the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields, and it covers access scope, auth/credit requirements, and caching behavior. An agent has everything needed to call this 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 coverage is 100%, so url, account, confirm, and cache_max_age are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the confirm=true requirement and the credit/caching behavior, but adds little semantics the schema does not already carry, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb+resource ("Retrieves one public Telegram post") and enumerates exactly what comes back (text, publish date, views, reactions, forward source, media previews, link preview). The word "one" and "public" clearly separate it from sibling listing tools like telegram_channel_posts and telegram_channel_details.

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?

It states a real exclusion (private and invite-only posts are not supported) and a hard precondition (requires confirm=true), plus how caching affects credit spend. It doesn't name an alternative tool for cases where a post is private, but the context needed to decide whether to call it is clear.

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