get_cancellation_requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'active' filter as a behavioral scope, which is useful, but it does not disclose whether results are paginated, sorted, or limited to a particular status beyond 'active'.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence communicates the operation, resource, and scope without filler. The parenthetical endpoint reference is minor but does not hurt conciseness.

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?

For a read-only list operation with one optional documented parameter and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. The only gap is a slightly ambiguous definition of 'active' and no mention of how the optional id changes the result set, but annotations and schema cover most operational context.

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%: the single optional id parameter is already documented as 'ID сервера (фильтр)'. The description does not add extra meaning about how id interacts with the 'active' filter, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 names a specific resource ('активных заявок на отмену услуг') and a clear operation ('Список'), so an agent knows this retrieves active cancellation requests. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like request_cancellation or delete_cancellation_request, but the word 'активных' adds scope and makes the purpose immediately distinguishable.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus related tools such as request_cancellation or delete_cancellation_request. It does not state that this is for viewing existing cancellation requests before acting on them, nor does it mention any conditions or alternatives.

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