set_chat_administrator_custom_title

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

The annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotent (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as the requirement for administrative rights, error conditions, or that it replaces any existing title. Thus it fails to disclose traits beyond what structured metadata already conveys.

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 one short sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action. It is highly concise and free of unnecessary detail.

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 three-parameter setter with no output schema, the description is too sparse to be contextually complete. It lacks information about expected behavior, return value, prerequisites, or error scenarios, leaving the agent to infer critical details from the tool name alone.

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 schema covers two of three parameters with descriptions; custom_title only has maxLength. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names and simple action statement. It does not clarify the format or constraints of the custom title beyond the schema's maxLength.

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 the action: 'Set a custom title for an administrator.' It identifies the resource (administrator) and the operation (set custom title), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like set_chat_title, the focus on 'administrator' inherently differentiates it.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention that it requires the user to already be an administrator, or that it only works in appropriate chat types. No exclusions or context are provided.

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