get_seller

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

Annotations already establish read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by revealing that the data is assembled from the seller-info popup via two POST requests to Market's /api/ and that the endpoint is disallowed in robots.txt. This is useful behavioral context, though it doesn't discuss auth or failure modes.

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 compact sentences: the first front-loads the primary output, the second adds relevant implementation detail. There is 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?

With one required parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema present, and safety annotations, the description supplies the additional behavioral context (request count and source) needed to understand the call. It doesn't enumerate return values, but that is unnecessary given the output schema. A small gap is the lack of explicit usage guidance, but that is already scored separately.

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%: business_id has a description identifying it as a seller id from search_products/get_product. The tool description adds no further parameter semantics, so the baseline of 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 specifies the resource (seller) and enumerates the returned components: storefront header fields (rating, ratings count, orders, years, status) and legal entity fields (name, INN, OGRN, address, cross-border flag). This clearly differentiates get_seller from siblings like get_product or get_reviews, which concern product or review data rather than seller identity.

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 use case is implied: an agent needs a seller's storefront rating/status or legal entity after obtaining a business_id from search_products/get_product. However, the description never states when to prefer this tool over siblings or gives exclusions, so the guidance is only implicit.

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