addresses__get_regions

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

Beyond the readOnly/destructive annotations, the description discloses a precise operational constraint: MCP-server throttling is limited to 1 request per 60 seconds, distinguished from iikoCloud limits, and it advises caching results. This is high-value behavior an agent must know before invoking the tool.

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?

Three short sentences cover purpose, parameter source, and rate-limit/caching guidance. Each sentence adds distinct value, and the most important information 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 one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, parameter acquisition, and a critical rate limit. It does not describe the exact return shape, and no output schema exists, but the absence is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates by explaining where the single parameter organizationIds comes from via organizations__get_organizations. It does not restate the array/UUID format, but for one parameter the source mapping is the most important missing semantic.

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 the resource and scope: 'Регионы (районы) организаций' (regions/districts of organizations), so an agent can infer the tool returns region data for given organizations. It lacks an explicit verb and does not contrast with sibling address tools, but it is still specific and unambiguous enough to be useful.

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 gives concrete usage context: where to get organizationIds ('organizationIds → organizations__get_organizations') and instructs caching because of MCP-server throttling. It does not state explicit exclusion or alternative conditions, but the provided context is clear and actionable.

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