BBIP: budget suggestions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description reinforces 'spends NO money' but adds little beyond that. It does describe response structure (budgets, duration fields), which is helpful but primarily about output rather than behavioral side effects.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states purpose, second provides usage workflow. Front-loaded with key info.

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, description specifies exact fields to extract from response (items[].budgets[].{oldPrice,price}, duration fields) and their meanings (kopecks/day, recommended flag). With 1 parameter and comprehensive schema coverage, this is fully sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 100% (itemIds described as 'Avito listing IDs...'). Description adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already provides. 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?

Description clearly states 'Returns recommended BBIP promotion bid/budget options for the listings' and distinguishes it as the first step of the BBIP flow, with explicit reference to sibling tools (forecast and purchase). Verb 'returns' + resource 'budget options' is specific.

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?

Description explicitly says 'This is the first step of the BBIP flow' and directs the agent to pass the output to two other tools. It also notes 'READ-ONLY: spends NO money' to discourage unintended use. No explicit 'when not to use' but context is clear.

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