ozon_get_prices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — price_index over 1.15 risks quarantine — which is context beyond a plain 'get prices' reading. But it does not state that this is a read-only operation, how pagination/limit behaves, or what 'current' means temporally. Moderately helpful but incomplete.

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 short sentences with the core data fields front-loaded. The Russian parenthetical '(цены, индекс цен)' redundantly repeats 'prices, price index' in English and wastes tokens, but the rest is tight and scannable.

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?

The description states the main returned fields and a critical business rule, and the schema covers the four optional parameters. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the return shape is only partially described, and the existence of the confusingly similar ozon_get_prices_v4 sibling is never addressed, leaving an agent uncertain which to select.

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 75%, with view, offer_id, and product_id documented in the schema itself; only limit lacks a description beyond its default. The tool description explains return fields, not input semantics, so it adds nothing to parameter understanding. Near the high-coverage 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 names concrete data elements — 'Current prices, discounts, min price and price index' — so an agent knows what the tool returns. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource construction, and it makes no attempt to differentiate itself from the similarly-named sibling ozon_get_prices_v4.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the near-identical ozon_get_prices_v4, the write-side ozon_set_prices, or ozon_pricing_competitor_prices. The quarantine-risk note implies a monitoring use case, but it never states alternatives or exclusion conditions.

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