Список быстрых ссылок

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 nothing beyond that — no note on pagination behavior, result volume, or permissions. It does not contradict the annotations, but contributes very little behavioral context.

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 that is front-loaded with the action and contains no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing usage and behavioral 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?

For a read-only list tool with zero required parameters, fully documented schema, and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. Annotations cover the safety profile, but nothing addresses result ordering or pagination beyond the offset parameter's own schema text.

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 limit, offset, and sitelink_set_ids are fully documented in the schema itself. The description's 'all or selected sets' mirrors the optional sitelink_set_ids filter but adds no syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Получить') and resource ('наборы быстрых ссылок') and clarifies the all-vs-selected scope. It separates itself from write operations like set_sitelinks/delete_sitelinks by verb alone, but never explicitly names a sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_ad_extensions or set_sitelinks, no prerequisites, and no conditions. The 'all or selected' phrasing hints at filtering but is a description of scope, not usage guidance.

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