Разбивка закупок за период

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact, that only 'проведённые' (posted) receipts are counted, but says nothing about ordering of 'top' results, pagination beyond limit, or how totals treat VAT.

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 purpose and breakdown dimensions are front-loaded, followed by filters and example questions. The trailing 'Период — даты YYYY-MM-DD' duplicates the schema pattern and could be dropped, but overall it is tight.

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?

With an output schema, full parameter coverage, and annotations present, the description covers what the tool aggregates, how it can be grouped and filtered, and typical questions. It leaves the relationship between groupBy and limit (limit = number of groups) and result ordering implicit, which is a minor gap.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter including date patterns, enum values, and defaults. The description only restates the date format and the available filter dimensions, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it aggregates posted receipts (purchases) over a period with a breakdown by supplier, month, contract, or total. The word 'закупки'/'поступления' clearly separates it from the sales-analytics sibling tools, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 gives concrete example questions ('топ поставщиков за год', 'закупки по месяцам', 'сколько закупили у ИП') and lists the filters that narrow the result. It never states when NOT to use it or which sibling (e.g. get_sales_breakdown, get_payments_breakdown) to pick for a different but similar question.

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