get_buyer_waybills

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, rate limits, response format) beyond that.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, 6 words). While it front-loads the purpose, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful context, making it less helpful than it could be.

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 17 optional parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is vastly incomplete. It does not explain what 'buyer waybills' are, how the tool differs from similar ones, or what the response structure looks like.

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 100%, with each parameter having a description in the input schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is sufficient for baseline scoring.

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 'List buyer waybills with filters' clearly states the action (list) and resource (buyer waybills). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_buyer_waybills_ex' or 'get_waybills', which likely serve similar purposes.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or comparison to siblings such as 'get_buyer_waybills_ex' or 'get_waybills'.

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