field_value_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the API method ПолучитьПредставлениеДанных(), which hints at a read operation, but it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites like an active form or session, failure modes, or return characteristics.

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 short, direct, and front-loaded with the action and subject. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices meaningful parameter and usage context, keeping it from a 5.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the tool is severely under-specified. An agent cannot tell what field_name refers to, what search_by_title does, what session context is required, or what exact text format to expect in return.

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 0% and the description does not explain any of the three parameters. field_name, session_id, and search_by_title are left entirely to inference from their names, with no clarification of formats, defaults beyond the schema, or how they affect the returned presentation text.

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 a clear verb ('Return') and resource ('field data presentation text'), and references the underlying method ПолучитьПредставлениеДанных(). It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from related siblings like field_info, field_tooltip, or table_cell_text, so it does not earn a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as field_info, field_tooltip, or table_cell_text. The description only states what it does, not when it should be selected or when it should not be used.

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