Delivery: push tracking event [sandbox]

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds critical context: events accumulate non-idempotently ('re-sending logs a duplicate'), it returns empty 200 on success, 4xx for rejection, and advises compliance with Avito's retry policy on 5xx. No contradiction.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds distinct value: purpose, usage scope, behavioral note, error handling, and sibling differentiation. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior (non-idempotence, error responses), retry policy, authorization (partners only), and relationship to siblings. This is complete for a tool with 10 parameters and detailed schema descriptions.

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 coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions for each parameter (e.g., dryRun and idempotencyKey include version info and behavior). The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Appends one parcel tracking event to Avito on behalf of the delivery service; does not modify existing history — a single status transition.' This is a specific verb+resource, and it distinguishes from siblings by noting that it 'only appends a status event' while other tools set parameters or reschedule parcels.

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 says 'Use this to report movement as it happens; one call records one event' and notes that it is 'For delivery-service PARTNERS only (not regular sellers).' It also names sibling tools and contrasts their functions, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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