search_stop_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read nature is known. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as which specific stop lists are searched, whether the result is a boolean or a list, or any rate limits or auth requirements. It merely restates the operation without adding nuance.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that captures the essence of the tool without any wasted words. It is maximally concise while still being informative.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema + annotations cover the safety profile and parameters. However, without an output schema, the description does not clarify what the response indicates (e.g., whether it returns a boolean presence or matching list names), which would be useful for an agent. This is a notable gap.

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%, with both 'email' and 'dry_run' having clear descriptions in the input schema. The tool description itself provides no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Поиск email в стоп-листах' clearly states a specific action (search) and resource (email in stop lists). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling operations like 'add_stop_list_email' or 'remove_stop_list_email', which mutate the lists, and other search tools like 'search_docs'.

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 tool is for checking if an email is present in stop lists, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. No alternative tools are mentioned, though the name is self-explanatory.

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