ozon_list_workflows

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already conveys that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the output shape ('JSON: [{name, category, when_to_use}]') and the follow-up tool, which helps, but it does not disclose other behavioral details such as pagination, filtering, or auth requirements.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds useful information.

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?

Fully sufficient for a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool: it states what is returned alert and directs the agent to the companion tool for detail. The output schema plus readOnlyHint cover the remaining 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the empty input schema already covers the parameter surface. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable but not an extra contribution beyond the schema baseline.

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?

Starts with a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('ready-made analytical workflows (recipes) for this marketplace'). The parenthetical 'recipes' and the contrast with the sibling fetch tool make the purpose immediately clear.

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?

Clearly tells the agent to use this tool to list available workflows and points to '{svc}_get_workflow' when the full step-by-step plan for one recipe is needed. It gives the key routing hint, though it does not spell out explicit exclusion cases.

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