user_service_order_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The 'GET' prefix weakly implies a safe read, but nothing is said about auth requirements, pagination behavior, impersonation semantics, or what the response contains.

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 content is short and front-loaded with the endpoint, but 'Тег: Услуги' and 'Спека: user' are spec metadata that carry no actionable value for an agent and dilute the useful line.

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 3-parameter listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate: it omits what is returned, pagination semantics, and the impersonation behavior implied by the user_id parameter.

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 limit, offset, and user_id. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the HTTP endpoint and a one-line purpose ('Список услуг для заказа' – list of services for an order), which conveys a read-listing operation. However, it is not clearly distinguished from siblings such as user_service_get or admin_service_order_get, and the fragment 'for order' is ambiguous about what the list represents.

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, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to any alternative. The only context is the endpoint path, leaving the agent to infer that this lists orderable services.

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