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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It helpfully states the output shape as a table of 'characteristic → values' and constrains comparison to 2–5 products, but it does not explicitly say whether the operation is read-only, whether it requires auth, or how invalid ids are handled.

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 two efficiently structured sentences: the first states what the tool does and its output format, the second explains the sole parameter. No filler or redundant information.

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 one-parameter comparison tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, comparison fields, output table shape, parameter semantics, and the 2–5 product constraint. Minor behavioral details such as read-only status are absent but not critical for a comparison operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare 'ids' array. It does so by explaining that ids may be product ids, article numbers, or product addresses, and by tying the 2–5 item constraint to that parameter.

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, 'Сравнить' (compare), a specific resource, 2–5 products, and the comparison dimensions: price, availability, frequencies, area and characteristics. This operationally distinguishes it from sibling tools like product details and product search, which target one product or discovery rather than side-by-side comparison.

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 comparison purpose is clear and implicitly indicates when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over usilitel_product_details or usilitel_products_search. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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