CPA-аукцион: мои ставки

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context by explaining cursor pagination and parameter roles, which is valuable 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?

Two short sentences in Russian, no wasted words. The first sentence states the overall purpose, the second explains parameters. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple read-only paginated list with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description explains what is returned and how pagination works. However, it does not describe the structure or fields of the returned bids, which would improve completeness.

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%, but the description adds meaning by explaining pagination context: 'fromItemID — курсор (ID объявления, с которого продолжить), batchSize — размер страницы.' This clarifies the cursor logic and page size constraints beyond the schema's basic 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 the tool retrieves 'current and available bids in the CPA auction with cursor pagination,' specifying the exact action and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling write tool 'cpa_auction_save_item_bids'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it describes pagination, it does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The sibling list includes many tools, but no comparison is provided.

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