avito_list_cabinets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true holistically, and the description adds important behavioral context: 'Secret values are never returned.' This reassures agents about data sensitivity beyond what the schema or annotations convey, and the explicit JSON return shape clarifies what the agent can expect.

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?

Two compact sentences immediately state the action and return JSON shape, with no filler. The secret-value disclaimer is a single clause that earns its place for safety. This is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 read tool, the description is complete: it identifies the resource, states what the output will look like (including the fields_needed array), and sets security expectations. The agent has all necessary context to call the tool correctly without needing an 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 tool has zero parameters distorted, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema carries no burden. The description adds the 'for this marketplace' setup context, but with no parameters to explain, the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is a strong 4.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List configured cabinets for this marketplace and which one is active.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like avito_use_cabinet, avito_add_cabinet, and avito_remove_cabinet by focusing on discovery rather than mutation or selection.

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 implies the tool is for inspecting configured cabinets and identifying the active one, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus siblings or provide any exclusions. The context is clear enough for a simple read operation, but there is no direct alternative routing.

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