Bozor va narx tahlili

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the detail that it collects live listings and returns recommendations, but does not elaborate on internal behavior like potential rate limits or data freshness. The added context is useful but not extensive, fitting a baseline 3 given annotation coverage.

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 well-structured with a bulleted list of outputs, making it easy to scan. It front-loads the core purpose and provides targeted use cases and a practical tip, with no wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (11 params, no required params, no output schema), the description clearly explains the return values and usage guidance. It could mention limitations like the need for category filtering, but the tip already covers a key edge case. It's nearly complete 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 all 11 parameters are documented with descriptions (e.g., query, city_id, sample_size). The description does not add extra parameter-level guidance beyond the tip about category_id, which is helpful but minor. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already covers the parameters well.

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 states the tool performs market analysis for a product/segment, listing specific outputs (price stats, competition level, seller split, recommendations). It distinguishes itself from siblings like olx_find_competitors and olx_compare_my_advert by focusing on aggregate market data rather than individual competitor comparison.

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?

Provides explicit use cases such as 'how much should I sell X for' and 'how competitive is this niche', and notes no auth needed. It also gives a tip to narrow with category_id to avoid irrelevant matches, helping agents decide when to apply this tool over other search tools.

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