Поиск ВН

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool searches and returns information, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly mention that it makes no changes, requires no authentication, or discuss what happens if no results are found. The Russian language support is a helpful behavioral detail, but overall the description gives only minimal behavioral disclosure.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key input types and scope. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple with one param and no output schema, and the description covers the purpose and input format adequately. It mentions that results return information about found VNs, which is somewhat vague, but given the low complexity, the description is reasonably complete. It does not cover edge cases like empty results, but this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description is thorough, covering both Russian names and ID formats. The description adds the VNDB context and return behavior, but it does not significantly enhance the parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 searches for a visual novel on VNDB by title (with Russian support) or ID, which is a specific verb-plus-resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are all list management and auth operations.

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 when to use this tool: when you need to find a VN by name or ID, possibly in Russian. It provides clear context but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. However, the sibling tools are obviously different, so usage context is reasonably clear.

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