Shahar / tuman ID sini topish

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior; the description adds 'No auth needed', which is a useful access/behavioral fact beyond the schema and annotations. It also makes clear the operation is a pure lookup by place name, with no side effects.

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, each earns its place: function and examples, auth requirement, and downstream usage. The core action is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 single-parameter, low-complexity lookup with rich annotations, the description is nearly complete: input, output kinds, auth, and downstream use. It doesn't specify the exact return shape, but the absence of an output schema is compensated by the explicit list of IDs returned.

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?

Input schema already documents 'name' with 100% coverage, so baseline is 3; the description adds concrete examples ('Samarqand', 'Chilonzor', 'Ташкент') and clarifies the parameter is a place name that maps to OLX location IDs. That extra semantic detail justifies a 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?

States a specific verb ('Find'), the exact resource ('OLX city_id / district_id / region_id'), and the input ('by place name'). The purpose is sharply distinct from sibling tools like olx_search_offers or olx_get_profile, so an agent can select it unambiguously.

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?

Explicitly says when to use the tool ('Use the IDs for market search filters ... and for advert location') and notes no auth is needed. It doesn't name alternative tools or exclusions, but the use-case statement is clear enough.

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