avito_get_published_ad

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld. The description adds value beyond them by stating no connection/login is needed (auth context) and that the response also includes similar ads. No rate limits or output format are given, but for a simple read this is solid.

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 sentences: purpose first, parameter guidance second. No filler, and the most decision-relevant information (public, no login) 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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, access mode (no login) and the key param distinction. It could note where the public listId comes from, but otherwise nothing an agent needs to call it 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 coverage is 0% and the schema only says the lone listId is a string. The description compensates by clarifying it is the public listId, distinct from the internal account adId, which is exactly the disambiguation an agent needs. It lacks a format/where-to-find-it example, hence not a 5.

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 détail public d'une annonce et ses annonces similaires') and a scope qualifier ('sans connexion'). This distinguishes it from siblings like avito_get_my_ad (account's internal ad) and avito_search_ads, so an agent can place it without opening other schemas.

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?

Gives clear context for use: public, no login required, and use the public listId rather than the account's internal adId. This implicitly routes away from the internal-ad sibling, though no alternative tool is named explicitly, so it stops short of a full when/when-not statement.

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