Get Ozon seller profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the exact output shape, badge-derived counts like '20,6 K заказов', and a caveat about rating richness. This goes beyond what annotations alone provide.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then use cases, then a compact output list, and finally a relevant caveat. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 no output schema, the description correctly takes responsibility for listing return values and does so in useful detail. It also covers the main use case and a known data-quality limitation. Minor gaps like error behavior are not critical for a read-only profile lookup 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 coverage is 100%, with the seller parameter already documented as a slug, numeric id, or URL. The description does not add any further parameter-level meaning, but it does not need to because the schema already fully explains accepted input formats.

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 names a specific resource ('Shop profile for a seller') and ties it to a concrete purpose: trust checks before buying from an unknown shop. It also enumerates the returned fields, making it unmistakable what the tool does and how it differs from sibling tools like product details or seller catalog.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use it: when the user asks 'is this seller trustworthy?' or before buying from an unknown shop. It also gives a useful limitation—'Product-card seller.rating is often richer than this page'—which steers agents toward richer data when available, though it does not name the exact sibling tool to use instead.

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