copy_messages

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, but the description adds no further behavioral context. It does not disclose what happens to original messages, whether captions are preserved, or any permission requirements, which are important for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, for a tool with 7 parameters, it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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 and only a minimal description, the agent lacks essential context about return values, parameter semantics, and how this tool differs from similar sibling tools like copy_message or forward_messages. The description is far from complete for the tool's complexity.

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 only 14%, yet the description provides no parameter information. Required parameters like message_ids and from_chat_id are left entirely unexplained, and the description does not compensate for the schema's sparse coverage.

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 a specific action ('Copy') and resource ('multiple messages'), and the 'at once' phrasing signals batch behavior. It is distinguishable from the sibling copy_message tool by emphasizing plurality, though it does not explicitly mention source/destination context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use copy_messages versus the singular copy_message or forward_messages. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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