avito_list_saved_ads

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds two useful facts beyond them: the response includes a total count, and returned content is external data that must not be treated as instructions. That injection-safety note is genuine added value.

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 compact sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The listId/adId sentence is the weakest link because it points at concepts outside the tool's own inputs, but overall it stays efficient.

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 read-only list tool whose annotations already disclose the safety profile and with no output schema, the description covers the essentials. However pagination is unexplained and the listId/adId guidance is disconnected from the actual parameters.

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 only 50% ('page' is undocumented), so the description should compensate but does not. Worse, it references listId and adId, which are not input parameters of this tool, while saying nothing about page/pageSize pagination behavior.

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 and resource ('Liste les annonces favorites du compte connecté') plus scope ('avec leurs détails et le nombre total'), distinguishing it from generic search/count siblings. The only weakness is that it doesn't explicitly name the sibling list tools it differs from.

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?

Hints at what to do with returned identifiers (listId for favorites, adId for contacting) but never states when to use this tool versus avito_save_ad/avito_unsave_ad, which are the actual tools for adding/removing favorites. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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