upload_sticker_file

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read, non-destructive, idempotent write operation. The description adds that the upload is a preparatory step, but it doesn't disclose return values, auth requirements, or file constraints. It provides minimal added transparency beyond the 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?

A single, concise sentence that directly states the action and its purpose. No wasted words or redundancy.

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?

The tool has three required parameters and no output schema, but the description does not explain the return value (likely a file_id), the meaning of user_id, or required file format constraints. It is underspecified for an agent to use effectively without additional assumptions.

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 33% (only the 'sticker' parameter is described). The description offers no parameter guidance whatsoever. The purpose of 'user_id' in this context is ambiguous, and the description does not clarify how parameters relate to the stated purpose.

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: 'Upload a sticker file to Telegram', which is a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself by noting 'for later use in createNewStickerSet', separating it from other sticker-related tools like send_sticker or create_new_sticker_set.

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 explicitly ties the tool to a specific use case: preparing files for createNewStickerSet. It gives clear context for when to use it, but it lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions, such as the ability to pass a URL directly instead of uploading.

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