Все хранилища аккаунта (по проектам)

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

The description contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=false: a listing operation is read-only, but the annotation suggests the tool may not be read-only. No additional behavioral context such as pagination, sorting, or response format is disclosed, and the annotation contradiction undermines transparency entirely.

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, efficient Russian sentence that front-loads the key information: it is a list of all account S3 storages. There is no redundant or filler language, and every phrase contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description provides the essential scope—all account buckets with project association—but it does not mention pagination, ordering, or return field details, and there is no output schema to fill that gap. It is minimally adequate but leaves some ambiguity, especially given the contradictory readOnlyHint annotation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful meaning by noting that returned buckets are associated with project_id, which gives the agent a hint about the output structure without inventing input parameters that do not exist.

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 action ('Список' = list) and the resource ('S3-хранилищ аккаунта' = account S3 storages), and adds the specific scoping detail that buckets are tied to project_id. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_buckets and list_project_buckets, which are project-filtered or lack the account-wide project grouping.

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 does not provide any explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison with similar listing tools. It never mentions list_buckets or list_project_buckets as alternatives, nor does it explain when the account-wide all-project variant should be chosen over a project-scoped one. Usage is only implied by the tool's name.

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