Заказы: создать этикетки

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-destructive mutation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description mentions the dryRun parameter for previewing requests, which adds some transparency. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or error behavior beyond what is implied by the task generation.

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 concise with two sentences, each providing essential information. No redundant or extraneous text.

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 adequately explains the purpose and the follow-up action (using orders_download_label). It lacks information about potential errors or output format, but the core workflow is covered. Given no output schema, this is reasonably complete.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add significant information beyond the schema, as the schema already explains dryRun and idempotencyKey in detail.

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 action (generating labels), the resource (orders), and a limit of 100 orders. It also mentions the return of taskID and linking to orders_download_label. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling orders_generate_labels_extended.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like orders_generate_labels_extended. The description only states what it does without contextual usage recommendations.

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