keyso_get_clustering_node_uid

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly declares 'Method: GET' and uses 'Получение' (retrieval), which signals a read-only operation, and gives an example request. However, it does not mention auth requirements, response format, error behavior, or rate limits.

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?

The description is short and well-structured: purpose comes first, followed by method, path, and example. Every line earns its place, with no unnecessary 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 GET with one required parameter, the description gives the essential endpoint mechanics: method, path, and example. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the returned 'folders' data looks like, nor any guidance on when this endpoint should be preferred over related clustering tools.

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 100%, and the schema already explains uid, token, and base_url. The description adds a URL template and a concrete example for uid, which helps confirm how the path parameter is used, but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action ('Получение' — retrieving) and resource ('папок кластеризации' — clustering folders), and gives the API path. It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate this from the very similar sibling keyso_get_clustering_node_uid_id_keywords.

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?

No usage guidance is provided: there is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no context about which workflow requires it. The sibling list contains many similar clustering endpoints, so an agent gets no selection criteria from the description.

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