Обновить объявление

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely new behavioral trait beyond annotations: the modified ad is sent to moderation, which tells the agent the change is not immediately live. This is meaningful operational 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?

Two short sentences with zero waste; the mutation is front-loaded and the moderation consequence follows. Every clause earns its place.

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 an update tool with full annotation coverage and a fully described schema, the description supplies the essential extra fact (post-update moderation) plus the editable field set. Missing only the routing against sibling write tools, which prevents a 5.

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 all five parameters (including title2 and ad_id). The description names only a subset of editable fields (title, text, link) and adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (обновить) and resource (текстовое объявление) and enumerates the mutable fields (заголовок, текст, ссылка). It is clearly distinct from create_text_ad by the verb, though it never names siblings like manage_ads or update_campaign, so differentiation rests on the verb alone.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as manage_ads or create_text_ad. The moderation note hints at consequences but not at selection between sibling tools.

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