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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it does not say whether these are static curated lists versus search results, how many items are returned, or whether entries link to individual places.

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 compact sentence, front-loaded with the resource type. The category enumeration is dense but each example carries informational weight as a distinct collection theme.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It never indicates what a 'подборка' object contains (ID, title, linked places), which the missing output schema leaves unexplained.

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% and the city parameter is fully documented in the schema, including accepted slugs and synonyms. The description's 'по городам' merely echoes that, adding no syntax or semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the resource ('тематические подборки') and enumerates concrete categories (новогодние, лофты, дворцы, теплоходы), so an agent can infer it returns curated venue collections. However, there is no verb and no statement of what is actually returned, and nothing explicitly distinguishes it from sibling search_places or get_place.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. The phrase 'по городам' only hints that the tool can be filtered by city, without saying when an agent should prefer this over search_places.

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