Raqobatchi e'lonini ko'rish

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only, open-world, and idempotent. The description adds useful behavior: it works on public details and include_phones mirrors the OLX 'Show phone' button, which is the main non-obvious action. The seller-statistics side effect appears in the schema, so it is not lost.

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 purposeful sentences with no filler: the first covers the operation and returned data, the second covers the optional phone flag, and the third states the use case. Everything earns its place and the most important information is 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?

Without an output schema, the description still enumerates the major fields an agent can expect and mentions the markdown/json response switch. It does not detail error cases or auth, but 'public details' and the strong safety annotations make this sufficient for a read-only lookup tool.

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 description supplies important semantics the schema lacks for offer_id: it is a numeric id coming from search results. It also reinforces include_phones's behavior, while response_format is already fully explained by its enum-specific schema descriptions.

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 names a concrete operation—get full public details of an OLX listing by numeric id—and enumerates the returned content: description, parameters, price, seller, location, promotion flags, dates, and contacts. This clearly distinguishes it from narrower siblings like search, seller profile, or phone-only tools.

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?

It gives clear context: the id comes from search results and the tool is useful for studying how a competitor writes and positions a listing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the intended scenario is evident.

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