ozon_certificate_info

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses nothing about whether the call is read-only, what response shape to expect, whether a missing certificate errors, or any side effects. The phrase 'details' only implies a lookup.

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 text is short, but mostly redundant: the Russian parenthetical repeats the English phrase and no useful information is front-loaded. This is under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least state what kind of certificate this is and how the ID is obtained. It does neither, leaving real ambiguity among several certificate-related sibling tools.

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 0% and the description adds no guidance about certificate_id, such as its source, scope, or validation rules. Only the parameter name and integer type hint at its meaning.

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 'Certificate details' merely paraphrases the tool name (info -> details); it does not state an explicit action or identify what kind of certificate this covers. It does not distinguish ozon_certificate_info from siblings like ozon_certificate_list, ozon_brand_certificates, or ozon_product_certificates.

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 guidance on when to call this tool, how it relates to ozon_certificate_list or other certificate tools, or what prerequisite ID to use. An agent must guess the intended flow.

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