ozon_order_fbs_digital_act

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a meaningful fact: digital acts were removed by Ozon on 2026-03-22 and the regular act is now used. However, it does not say what happens when this tool is invoked, whether it is deprecated, or what response to expect.

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 and contains a useful deprecation note with no filler. But the leading 'Act status;' fragment is under-specified and the structure does not clearly separate the operation from the context.

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 one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description still leaves the core questions unanswered: what action is performed, what id means, and whether the call succeeds after removal of digital acts. The deprecation note alone is not sufficient.

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?

The schema has one parameter, id, with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions id. An agent cannot determine what id refers to, how to obtain it, or how it relates to an act. This is a complete failure to compensate for the schema.

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 has no operative verb; 'Act status' is a noun fragment that merely labels the resource. It adds a relevant domain note about digital acts being removed, but never defines what the tool actually does for the caller.

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?

The description implies that the regular act should be used instead of the digital act, but it does not name the alternative tool such as ozon_order_fbs_act_status. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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