ozon_finance_cash_flow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only report, what the response contains, whether it supports pagination, or what timezone/format rules apply. Saying 'cash flow' reveals no behavior beyond the name.

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 short, but it is short because it is a tautology, not because it is efficiently informative. There is no meaningful structure, no front-loaded detail, and no sentence that helps an agent act on it.

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 finance report tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to define the report content, the meaning of the date range, or how this endpoint differs from closely related finance siblings.

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 description does not compensate by explaining date_from/date_to, their format, or what period semantics they carry. The agent is left to guess whether the dates are inclusive, what string format is expected, or what timezone is used.

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 is a direct restatement of the tool name: 'Cash flow (движение средств)' adds no verb, no resource detail, and no action. An agent cannot tell what operation is performed, what data is returned, or how this differs from the many sibling finance tools.

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 about when to use this tool instead of ozon_finance_transactions, ozon_finance_totals, ozon_finance_balance, or other finance endpoints. The name alone gives a weak hint, but no context, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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