Профили организаций

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and openness need no restating. The description adds that only profiles 'доступные' to the current account are returned, which is a genuine scoping detail beyond the annotations, but it says nothing about result volume, pagination, or ordering.

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 short sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb. It is efficient but arguably too terse for a listing tool, leaving no room for any usage or scoping detail.

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 three optional parameters, no output schema, and only read-only annotations, the agent still does not know what fields a returned profile contains or how pagination should be driven across pages, since nothing in the description supplements the bare schema. Adequate to call, but thin for building a workflow.

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%, including the non-obvious note that offset takes the LimitedBy value of the previous page. The description adds no parameter meaning whatsoever, so the baseline of 3 for a fully documented schema 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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Получить ... профили организаций') plus the source system (Яндекс Бизнес), which lets an agent distinguish it from list_vcards or list_campaigns. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or stating the scope boundary (all profiles vs. filtered) in a comparative way.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the alternative ways to reach business data (e.g. list_vcards), and no hint about paginating with limit/offset. The word 'доступные' weakly implies a discovery/listing context, but the agent must infer everything else.

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