Настроить диалог

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the non-obvious side effect that switching to bot mode returns the conversation to the scenario and removes the operator, and it explicitly warns that blocking is not possible via this tool. This is valuable behavioral context not encoded in the annotations or schema.

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 tightly packed sentences: the first lists what the tool changes, the second explains the important side effect of bot mode, and the third states a limitation. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 settings-update tool, this covers the essential behavior, side effects, and a key limitation. There is no output schema, and the description does not mention what the API returns or potential failure conditions, but the schema fully documents inputs and annotations cover the safety profile.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds a small amount of meaning for mode (bot mode removes the operator), but the other parameters (dialog, case, tags, pinned, ai_enabled) are not elaborated beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific verb ('Меняет') and the resource (dialog), and enumerates the mutated aspects: mode, AI answering, tags, and pinning. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling dialog tools like dialogs_list, dialogs_reply, and dialogs_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?

The intended use is clear from the stated purpose: update dialog settings. It also gives an explicit exclusion—blocking a contact cannot be done here and happens through Telegram. It does not, however, name sibling alternatives or provide broader when-to-choose guidance.

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