Заказы: создать этикетки (до 1000)

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

Annotations already indicate non-readOnly and non-destructive; description adds that it creates a task and returns a taskID, but does not elaborate on side effects, error handling, or task persistence. The openWorldHint=true is not contradicted but also not further explained.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and limit. It is efficient and avoids redundancy, though it could benefit from slight structuring to separate outcome from usage hints.

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?

Given the tool has parameters for dryRun and idempotencyKey with significant behavior (preview, deduplication), the description fails to mention these features. No output schema exists, and the return value is only hinted at; the tool is incomplete without describing these capabilities.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as clarifying dryRun or idempotencyKey usage, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 creates a task for label generation for up to 1000 orders, specifying the action and resource. It also links to the subsequent download tool. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'orders_generate_labels', which may have a lower limit, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 implies use for large batches (up to 1000) and directs to 'orders_download_label' for retrieval, providing basic context. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no mention of prerequisites or exclusion criteria, leaving guidance implicit.

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