mgmt_social_networks_list

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral information. 'List' conveys a non-mutating read operation, but it does not disclose authentication needs, response shape, scoping, or any edge behavior; the description is not contradictory but only minimally transparent.

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 tool-defining sentence is short and efficient, but the raw URL prefix 'https://yandex.ru/dev/metrika/ru/management/' does not earn its place as explanatory content. Acceptably compact, yet not polished.

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 simple read-only list call with one optional parameter, the description is mostly adequate, but it leaves 'social goal type' undefined and gives no guidance about how the result relates to goals or counters. No output schema makes the missing return/usage context more noticeable.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single optional 'pretty' parameter, so the schema already documents parameter semantics. The description adds no further parameter detail; the baseline 3 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('social networks'), with a qualifier ('for social goal type') that distinguishes it from related tools like mgmt_messengers_list. The leading documentation URL is noise, but the core sentence clearly names the tool's object and action.

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 about when to use this list operation versus siblings like mgmt_goals_list, mgmt_messengers_list, or the stat_* tools. The phrase 'for social goal type' hints at context, but no explicit when/when-not or alternative routing is provided.

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