moex_raw

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context: all_block collects every page of a block, and the path must omit the /iss prefix and .json suffix. It still says nothing about auth, rate limits, or the response shape.

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?

Three short, front-loaded fragments with no filler; the path rule and the all_block semantics are stated immediately. Nothing extraneous, though it is arguably too terse for a 7-param open-world tool.

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?

With no output schema, 7 parameters, a nested params object, and openWorldHint=true, the description should say more about the return shape and what keys the params object accepts. It covers the hardest parameter (path) but leaves the response contract and the generic params bag unexplained.

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 coverage is only 57%, and the description compensates well for the critical undocumented path parameter by specifying the format and giving a worked example, plus explaining what all_block does. The remaining params (params object, columns, filename, save_csv, max_inline_rows) are left to 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 states a concrete verb+resource: fetch any ISS route, with the required path format and an example. It implicitly positions itself as the generic/raw escape hatch, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the many specialized siblings (moex_quote, moex_candles, etc.).

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?

Usage is implied — 'any ISS route' signals a general-purpose fallback — and the path format rule plus all_block example are actionable. However, with 14 siblings it gives no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternative guidance, which is the main gap for this kind of generic tool.

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