TrxPromo: комиссии

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds critical behavioral context: the tool uses a non-standard GET with a body ('Это GET с body — нестандартно'), which is important for correct invocation. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose, second notes an important behavioral quirk. Every word earns its place.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, annotations cover safety), the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose and a key behavioral trait. Lacks details on return format but output schema is absent.

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 one required parameter (itemIDs) described as 'ID объявлений.' The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

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 it checks promotion availability and commission sizes for ads ('Проверка доступности продвижения и размера комиссий для объявлений'). It is specific but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like cpa_target_get_promotions_by_item_ids, though the context implies a focus on commissions.

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 the tool is used to check commission sizes and promotion availability, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or any exclusions. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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