Get Ozon product reviews

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral nuance: variantOnly may return empty while the card shows pooled totals, sort values are listed, hasPhotos filters reviews, and key review fields including reviewsScope are disclosed. No contradiction with annotations.

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, dense paragraph that front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: scoping behavior, sort, hasPhotos, return fields, and fallback strategy. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description enumerates the key review fields and explains edge-case behavior (empty variantOnly, retry strategy). Combined with 100% schema parameter descriptions, an agent has sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond schema by explaining the real-world meaning of variantOnly ('matches Ozon UI «Этот вариант»... may be empty while card shows pooled totals'), enumerating sort options, and providing retry logic. This adds real semantic value over the schema descriptions.

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?

Description opens with 'Buyer reviews for a product SKU', a specific resource and operation. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by detailing variant scoping ('Default variantOnly=true matches Ozon UI «Этот вариант»') and review-specific fields like 'reviewsScope', which no other sibling covers.

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?

Provides explicit parameter-level guidance: 'Pass variantOnly=false for all sibling variants on the same card' and a clear retry instruction when count=0. Context is strong, though it does not explicitly route between tool-level alternatives such as when to use product reviews vs product questions or offers.

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