Resolve a banner/curated selection to products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds that it reads the Nuxt payload rather than an API endpoint, which is important behavioral context about how it works. It also mentions the verbose flag for raw payloads. 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and return values, then explains the technical method. There is no fluff, every sentence contributes essential information. Efficient and clear.

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 tool with two parameters, one required, and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, how it works (Nuxt payload), and the source of the input (catalogLink from banners). It doesn't detail pagination or total count semantics, but with no output schema expected, this is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 both parameters thoroughly. The description adds that catalogLink comes from oskelly_home_banners, which is helpful context, but it doesn't add meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema 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 clearly states the tool opens a curated-selection page via a banner's catalogLink and returns its title, filter preset, total item count, and first page of products. It uses a specific verb ('resolve') and resource ('curated selection'), and distinguishes it from API-based tools by noting it reads the Nuxt payload. This differentiates it from sibling tools like oskelly_search_products.

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 explains the tool is for curated pages from oskelly.ru banners, specifically when you have a catalogLink (e.g., from oskelly_home_banners). It implies when to use it (when dealing with banner links) and gives context that it uses server-side rendering. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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