unpin_all_chat_messages

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

Annotations already indicate it's a non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent operation. The description adds no additional behavior context, such as permissions required, scoping (e.g., whether forum topics are excluded), or effects on the chat's pinned message list. No contradiction with annotations.

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. It states the core action directly and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and good annotations, the description is minimally viable but lacks context about when to use it versus similar sibling tools and any limitations. The 'chat' scope could be ambiguous given the existence of forum-topic-specific unpin-all tools.

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 100% of the parameter descriptions (chat_id is 'Chat ID or @username'). The description adds no parameter-level information, so it earns the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Unpin') and resource ('all messages in a chat'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'unpin_chat_message' (single message) and 'unpin_all_forum_topic_messages' (forum topic scope). The noun 'chat' matches the tool name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as 'unpin_chat_message' or 'unpin_all_forum_topic_messages'. The description simply states the action without context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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