ozon_report_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state that the tool returns a status and a download link, which is useful and implies a read-only information operation. However, it does not disclose what statuses are possible, whether the link expires, or what happens when the report is not ready.

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 very concise and front-loads the key output: status and download link. There is no wasted text, though the parenthetical repetition adds little value.

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 tool with a required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too thin. An agent needs to know that 'code' is the report code and how the returned status/link are structured, neither of which is explicitly stated.

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%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented 'code' parameter. It only implies that 'code' relates to a report via the parenthetical '(статус отчёта)', but it never explicitly explains that 'code' is the report identifier or how to obtain it.

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 indicates the tool provides a report's status and download link, which is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like ozon_report_list (listing reports) and report creation tools. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'get', so the grammar is slightly ambiguous.

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, nor any mention of how to obtain the required 'code' parameter. An agent must infer from the name and sibling context that this is for checking a specific report's status, but no explicit usage direction is provided.

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