ym_feedbacks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to emphasize safety. It adds behavioral context about pagination and directs to another tool for comments, which is helpful. No contradictions.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the additional instruction about comments is concise and relevant.

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 description is too brief. It does not explain the parameters (business_id, page_token, limit) despite 0% schema coverage. While an output schema exists, the agent lacks guidance on how to use the pagination parameters or the importance of business_id. Essential details are missing for a tool with three parameters.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It does not mention page_token, limit, or business_id at all. The description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema names.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get product reviews/feedbacks.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('reviews/feedbacks'). The mention of pagination adds specificity. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool ym_execute by redirecting for comments.

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 provides clear context: it is for getting reviews/feedbacks with pagination. It explicitly tells when to use ym_execute for comments, offering an alternative. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or additional exclusion criteria.

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