Подключить или настроить бота

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

Beyond the sparse annotations, it discloses that the token is verified via a live Telegram request, stored encrypted, and that changing token/mode restarts a running bot. This adds important side-effect and security context not present in 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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Each sentence contributes distinct operational information: how to connect, how to configure, and the restart side effect.

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 9-parameter upsert with no output schema, the description plus complete schema comments provide a solid operational picture, including auth verification and restart behavior. It lacks explicit return-value or error semantics, but the full schema coverage mitigates this.

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 input schema already covers all 9 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description mainly restates the 'bot' parameter's dual role and that token is required when connecting; it adds no new format or syntax details beyond the schema.

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 clear dual purpose: 'Без параметра bot подключает нового бота' (create) and 'С параметром bot меняет настройки' (update). This explicitly distinguishes the two modes and separates the tool from sibling bot operations like bots_control and bots_delete.

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 gives clear context: omit 'bot' to connect a new bot, include it to change settings, and notes that changing token or mode restarts a running bot. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool relative to bots_control.

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