addresses__get_cities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds meaningful behavioral context: the MCP-server throttling (1 request per 60 seconds) and a caching recommendation, plus the response grouping per-organization. This goes beyond annotations and gives the agent practical operational knowledge.

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 three concise sentences: purpose, dependency, and throttling/caching. Each sentence earns its place with no redundant wording, and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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 tool with a single request object, the description covers the purpose, the source of required IDs, the rate limit, and caching advice. The response grouping is also noted. Missing explicit response format details are minor since annotations already convey safety, and the schema covers parameter definitions.

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 description mentions that organizationIds can be obtained from organizations__get_organizations, which is a more actionable pointer than the schema's reference to the raw API operation. However, it does not elaborate on includeDeleted or other parameter nuances. Since schema coverage is 0% and the schema itself already documents both parameters, the description partially compensates with the source hint but not fully.

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 states 'Города организаций' (Cities of organizations) with the added detail that the response is grouped per-organization. This clearly identifies the resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like addresses__get_regions and addresses__get_streets_by_city. The verb and resource are specific, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 provides a dependency hint by pointing to organizations__get_organizations for obtaining organizationIds, which is actionable usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, so the guidance is partial.

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