avito_get_public_store

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'sans connexion' tells the agent no authentication is required, which is important for routing. No rate-limit or failure behavior is described.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first, then the ID source and condition. Every clause earns its place and there is no filler.

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 one-parameter read-only public lookup with no output schema, the description covers the action, the parameter origin, and the no-auth condition. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning by explaining that storeId comes from a public ad, telling the agent where to obtain the value, but it gives no format/length/validation guidance beyond what the schema enforces (minLength 1, maxLength 100).

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?

States a specific verb (Lire), resource (le profil public d'une boutique Avito), the ID source (à partir du storeId d'une annonce publique), and the operating condition (sans connexion). This clearly sets it apart from the authenticated sibling avito_get_my_store by emphasizing 'public' and 'sans connexion'.

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 the use case (looking up a store you don't own, from a public ad's storeId, without login), which gives useful context. However, it never explicitly names alternatives such as avito_get_my_store for your own store, nor states exclusions or prerequisites.

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