⚠️ CPA-аукцион: сохранить ставки

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description uses a warning emoji and states 'saving new bids,' which implies writing. However, it does not elaborate on what gets destroyed (e.g., overwrites existing bids) or other behavioral traits. With annotations present, the description adds minimal extra context.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and key limitation. It uses a warning emoji but remains concise. Every sentence adds useful information, though the swagger reference is somewhat informal.

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 covers the main purpose and parameter hints but lacks information about return values (no output schema), error conditions, prerequisites, and detailed behavioral effects. Given the tool's complexity (writing up to 200 bids), more context would be beneficial.

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 has 100% description coverage. The tool description adds that bid is in kopecks and references swagger for details. While the schema descriptions are thorough, the tool description reinforces key points (like the 200-item limit) and provides context for the items structure.

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 that the tool saves new bids in a CPA auction for ads, with a limit of 200 per request. It specifies the items array structure. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like cpa_auction_get_user_bids or cpa_target_save_auto_bid, relying on context.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the 200-per-request limit but does not give conditions, prerequisites, or when not to use it. No explicit usage context.

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