set_list_membership

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

The description discloses a critical behavioral trait: Ozon reports no outcome for this operation, so the agent must confirm via get_lists(sku). This goes beyond annotations (none provided) and adds actionable context about side effects and confirmation workflow. The writes_enabled gating is also mentioned, though its exact meaning is not elaborated.

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 deliver the core purpose, the permission gate, and the confirmation read. No filler, front-loaded with the gating context, and every word earns its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity, the description covers purpose, permission gating, no-outcome behavior, and confirmation path. An output schema exists (though its content isn't shown here), which reduces the need to explain return values. Missing are explicit usage conditions and edge-case callouts, but the essential details are present.

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 parameter descriptions are detailed: add explains boolean semantics, sku notes variant guidance, list_id references get_lists()[].list_id. The description itself adds no extra parameter information beyond the schema, so 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 clearly states the action: put a product into a collection or wishlist, or take it out. It specifies the resource (list membership) and direction (add/remove). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like set_favorite, the operation is distinct enough.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The '[GATED by writes_enabled]' hint implies a permission prerequisite, but there is no mention of preconditions, typical use cases, or when other tools (like set_favorite) should be preferred. The agent must infer usage from the schema and context.

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