Mening e'lonlarim

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavior: returned fields, sorting newest first, stats structure, pagination behavior, and markdown-specific totals/conversion. This goes beyond the annotation baseline.

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 organized with a lead sentence, an Args block, and a Returns block. Every sentence adds useful information, and the most important scoping ('logged-in account's adverts') 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?

With five optional parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it documents all parameters, lists per-advert return fields, explains the stats object, states ordering, and describes output format differences. An agent has enough information to call the tool 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 only 40%, so the description carries the burden, and it succeeds. It explains the meaning of all five parameters: status values and default, query filtering by title, limit/offset pagination, and response_format choices. This is meaningful guidance beyond the raw schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('the logged-in account's adverts') and a differentiating scope ('by status with performance stats'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like olx_get_my_advert, which retrieves a single advert.

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 conveys a clear use case: listing the current account's adverts with status and performance stats. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as olx_get_my_advert for a single advert, or mention any prerequisites like having an active session.

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