ozon_certificate_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it is only a noun phrase restating the name. It doesn't state whether the operation is read-only, what the response contains, whether the status parameter filters results, or any other observable behavior.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The parenthetical Russian translation adds no information, and no useful details are front-loaded because none exist.

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 one undocumented parameter, no output schema, no annotations, and a large sibling list with overlapping certificate concepts, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot correctly select or invoke this tool with only 'All certificates (сертификаты).'

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 0% and the single 'status' parameter has no description in the schema. The description never mentions 'status' or explains what values it accepts, so an agent has no way to understand how the parameter affects the tool's behavior.

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 'All certificates (сертификаты).' essentially restates the tool name 'ozon_certificate_list' without adding meaning. It fails to specify which certificate domain is covered, making it indistinguishable from siblings like ozon_brand_certificates and 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 use this tool versus alternatives. The presence of sibling tools such as ozon_brand_certificates, ozon_product_certificates, and ozon_carriage_delivery_list makes this omission significant, yet the description offers no context, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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