Изменения объектов

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — that dictionaries mode returns only the current server time when timestamp is omitted — but omits return shape, limits (e.g. maxItems 50000) or rate-limit behavior.

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 that leads with the primary resource set and appends the dictionaries special case. No filler, though cramming three distinct modes into one clause reduces scannability slightly.

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 6-parameter, mode-driven tool with no output schema and no return-value documentation, the description covers the modes but not what the response contains or how field_names interacts with the ID filters. Adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for a polling/change-detection tool.

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 schema already documents mode, timestamp requirement per mode, and each ID list. The description largely restates the mode=dictionaries behavior rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 concrete verb ('Проверить изменения') and the resources covered (campaigns, groups, ads, dictionaries), and explicitly names mode=dictionaries. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_statistics or list_campaigns, though the mapping to the 'objects' mode is left implicit.

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: use it to poll for changes since a given time. However, it never says when to prefer this over sibling reads such as get_campaign/get_statistics, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites (e.g. that it is a change-feed rather than a full fetch).

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