Yandex Market: list businesses and shops

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only discovery operation ('Returns'), scopes results to what 'the token can reach', and explains the two-level account/shop structure that determines which IDs are returned. It does not mention pagination or failure modes, but for a simple list tool the primary behavior is clearly disclosed.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler. The return value is stated first, the structural context follows, and the usage ordering guideline is placed last. Every sentence 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?

For a discovery tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential return semantics (campaignId and businessId), the data model that makes those IDs meaningful, and the exact usage position relative to sibling tools. Nothing needed for 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?

The only parameter, connection_id, already has a complete schema description ('Required when more than one is configured'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which puts it at the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and names the exact resources ('shops' and 'business accounts') with their ID fields (campaignId and businessId). It clearly distinguishes this discovery tool from the ym_products_list, ym_stocks_get, ym_prices_get, and ym_orders_list siblings, which all operate on already-identified entities.

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 explicitly instructs 'Call this before the other ym_* tools', making the intended sequencing unmistakable. It also explains why: Yandex Market has a two-level structure and different methods need different identifiers, so an agent knows this tool supplies prerequisites for later calls.

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