ym_bids

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

The description confirms the read-only nature already indicated by the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds no further behavioral traits (e.g., authentication, rate limits, or side effects). Minimal additional transparency beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that deliver the core purpose and usage guidelines without any wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key action.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description fails to explain the key parameters (4 params, 0% schema coverage). This leaves a significant gap for the agent in correctly invoking the tool. The description should have included parameter semantics.

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 input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage in the schema. The tool description provides no explanations for offer_ids, page_token, limit, or business_id, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use these parameters.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'current bids at business level'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly naming alternatives (ym_execute with actions for suggestions and updates).

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 tells when to use this tool (to get current bids) and when to use alternatives (ym_execute with bid_recommendations or bids_update). This provides clear usage guidance.

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