run_olx_regions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add a genuinely useful non-schema detail — the '5 point per returned record' credit cost — but says nothing about rate limits, auth, pagination, or what happens with max_items. For a low-risk read lookup this is adequate but thin.

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?

Two tight sentences, purpose front-loaded, no padding. The trailing cost note is terse and slightly awkward ('5 point per returned record') but earns its place as pricing information.

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 simple three-parameter read tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, the region/cities branching, and cost. Remaining gaps (coordinate format, pagination interaction with max_items) are minor.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning the schema lacks: passing region_id switches the call from returning top-level regions to returning the cities of that single region. That mode distinction is not derivable from the parameter list alone.

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 resource (OLX geography) and what it returns (top-level regions, or the cities of one region, with ids and coordinates), and ties it to the offers-search workflow. It is distinguishable from run_olx_categories and run_olx_offers, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'for offers search' and by the region-or-cities branching, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no conditions, and no named alternative. An agent can infer intent but gets no routing guidance.

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