Доставка: отмена анонса [sandbox v1]

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation with open-world side effects. The description adds that it 'sends an event', implying an external effect, but does not explain the consequences of cancellation, reversibility, or any prerequisites. The dryRun and idempotencyKey parameters are described in the schema but not in the tool description.

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 a single sentence, concise but lacking additional context. It fits within a single line but could be more informative without becoming verbose. It is adequately sized for a simple tool but minimal information reduces its helpfulness.

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 tool is a mutation with no output schema. The description does not explain the effect of cancellation, prerequisites (e.g., existing announcement in 'test' status), or what happens to related data. Given the complexity of the domain (delivery) and the openWorldHint, more context is needed for safe and correct use.

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 80%, with descriptions for date, options, dryRun, and idempotencyKey. announcementID lacks a description. The tool description does not add any parameter-level details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation but does not enhance understanding.

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 '[SANDBOX v1] Отправка события об отмене тестового анонса' clearly indicates the tool sends an event to cancel a test announcement. The verb 'отправка события' and resource 'отмена тестового анонса' are specific, and the title and name distinguish it from siblings like delivery_v1_cancel_parcel.

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 such as delivery_cancel_announcement_3pl. The sandbox context is implied by the title but not stated in the description. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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