avito_get_boost_packages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's 'Aucun achat' reinforces that no side effect occurs and enumerates what is returned (offers, prices, units, slots), but adds little beyond the annotations and says nothing about rate limits, auth requirements, or empty-result behavior.

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 short sentences with zero filler, and the primary action plus the returned data are front-loaded before the read-only clarification. Every clause earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately carries the return-value information by naming the four data categories returned. Combined with annotations that cover the safety profile, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only the adId parameter remains unexplained.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter adId is undocumented in both schema and description. 'Pour votre annonce' loosely suggests adId identifies the caller's own ad, but no format, source of the id, or validation detail is given, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

A specific verb ('Lire') plus a specific resource (offres, prix, unités et créneaux de boost) scoped to 'votre annonce'. 'Aucun achat' implicitly separates it from the boost-purchase siblings (avito_prepare_boost / avito_execute_boost), but no sibling is named explicitly, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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 implies this is the inspection step preceding a purchase ('Aucun achat'), so an agent can infer it is the read-only preview of available boost options. However, it never states when to use this versus avito_prepare_boost or avito_execute_boost, nor any prerequisite such as needing an existing ad. Implied usage only.

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