Корзины маркетплейса

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, it discloses the absence of a confirmed checkout step, the need to pay in the app, and the per-cart calculation with honest «N всего, показано M» counts. This gives agents practical knowledge of behavior and limitations.

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 compact and information-dense, with the core purpose front-loaded and parameter semantics clearly separated. No sentence is wasted.

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 listing tool with one parameter and an output schema, it covers invocation limits, per-cart intelligence, and the critical checkout limitation. Missing return-value details are already covered by the output schema.

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 schema only provides a default value for limit, but the description fully explains its meaning: number of items shown per cart, with <=0 meaning all items, and clarifies per-cart handling. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 identifies the resource as marketplace carts, one per seller, and uses «показать» to convey a read/list operation. It does not explicitly contrast sibling tools like grocery_cart, but the marketplace scoping makes the object distinct.

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?

It clearly states that order placement through MCP is unsupported and that payment must happen in the app, which is critical for setting expectations when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the surrounding sibling list and resource scoping imply the boundary.

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