Платформа: список ПВЗ и постаматов

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior, so the description adds value by specifying the exact return fields, warning about the unbounded empty query, and explaining the id's role in other tools. It does not contradict 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?

The description is three focused sentences: functionality and return format, cross-reference, and a critical usage warning. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant text.

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 read-only nature, complete schema coverage, and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers return structure and a key usage caveat. It doesn't elaborate on every field's semantics or pagination, but the schema sufficiently handles parameter details.

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 coverage is 100% for all 11 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description only generically mentions filters (geo_id, coordinate range, pickup_point_ids) and does not add per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already 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 uses the specific verb 'Список' (list) with a clear resource ('ПВЗ, постаматов и точек самопривоза') and distinguishes from express siblings by noting the platform contour and delivery 'в другой день'. This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 identifies the platform-specific context and cross-references platform_create_offers, indicating a concrete use case. The warning about empty bodies and filter recommendations provides practical guidance, though it doesn't explicitly state when to avoid this tool in favor of alternatives.

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