Экспресс: поиск заявок

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: sorting by creation date, return of a cursor, and the rule that passing cursor makes other filters unnecessary. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by essential pagination details. No 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?

Given the 12 parameters are all schema-described and annotations are present, the description covers return shape, pagination, and sorting. It lacks explicit error cases but is otherwise complete for a search tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters. The description supplements this by clarifying the relationship between cursor, offset, and limit, and that cursor supersedes other filters. This adds semantic value 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 states 'Поиск заявок по фильтрам с пагинацией' (search claims by filters with pagination), specifying the verb, resource, and sorting. It distinguishes from sibling express_get_claim by noting the return format matches that tool while this one searches multiple claims.

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 explains pagination options (offset/limit vs cursor) and the cursor behavior, giving clear context for usage. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the search-vs-single-claim distinction is implied via the reference to express_get_claim.

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