wb_analytics_excise

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a meaningful rate limit, which is important. However, it does not describe the response format, pagination, whether the report is read-only, or any error conditions, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 a single compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows with the critical rate-limit constraint. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical clarification is useful for disambiguation.

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 tool is relatively simple, with two date parameters and no output schema. The description names the domain and the rate limit, which is a solid start, but it omits what the report actually returns and any date-range semantics. It is minimally adequate but has clear completeness gaps.

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 only 50%: date_from has a YYYY-MM-DD format hint, but date_to has only a type. The description adds no parameter-level meaning and does not compensate for the undocumented date_to parameter. This is a clear gap.

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 identifies the tool as a 'Chestny Znak excise/labeling report', which clearly conveys a reporting operation on a distinct domain (Russian excise/labeling data). It lacks a strong verb like 'get' or 'fetch', but the noun 'report' is sufficient and the domain separates it from the many sibling analytics 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?

The description provides clear context: this is for Chestny Znak excise/labeling reports. It also gives a practical usage constraint with the 10-request-per-5-hours limit, which helps the agent plan calls. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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