Создать список ретаргетинга

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write nature is covered. The description confirms it is a creation operation built from Metrica goals/segments but adds no side-effect, permission, or idempotency context beyond what the annotations and schema already convey.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first and zero filler. Efficient, though arguably too terse for a tool whose rules array has nested semantics.

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 write tool with no output schema, fully documented parameters, and annotations covering the mutation profile, the description is minimally adequate. It could have explained the rules structure or creation behavior, but the schema carries most of the load.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'из целей Метрики, сегментов или интересов' loosely maps to the type enum (RETARGETING/AUDIENCE) but introduces 'интересы', which has no corresponding enum value, adding slight ambiguity rather than meaning.

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?

States a specific verb ('Создать') and resource ('условие ретаргетинга'), and names the source data (цели Метрики, сегменты, интересы). Clear enough to distinguish it from the list/update/delete siblings by name, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with update_retargeting_lists or list_retargeting_lists.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, despite being one member of a CRUD family (list_/update_/delete_retargeting_lists). The agent must infer that this is the creation path from the tool name alone.

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