cdek_delivery_points

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool returns a list of active delivery points, but does not disclose whether it's read-only, rate limits, or authentication needs. The recommendation for daily updates suggests infrequent changes, but more explicit behavioral context would be helpful.

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 concise and well-structured: a header line, a line about the return value, a usage recommendation, and the arguments with examples. No wasted words, clear and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown), the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers the essential: what it does, required parameter, optional filter. It lacks information on error handling or edge cases, but for a simple list retrieval, it is fairly complete.

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 0%, but the description adds examples and explanations for both parameters (city and search). It provides concrete examples like 'Москва' and 'Тверская', adding meaning beyond the schema titles. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Получение списка офисов СДЭК' (Getting list of CDEK offices) and specifies the API endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cdek_cities by focusing on delivery points, and mentions return of active pickup points and postomats.

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 includes a recommendation to update the list once a day, providing a usage hint. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs alternatives like cdek_cities or cdek_suggest_cities, though the purpose is clear enough.

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