Аккаунт, воронки и менеджеры

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the trailing "Только чтение" is largely redundant. What does add value is the disclosure of the returned content and its role as an id-prerequisite for the rest of the toolset, which is meaningful given there is no output schema.

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 sentences, both earning their place: the first declares the payload, the second gives the call-order guidance and the read-only guarantee. The routing advice is front-loaded rather than buried.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining what comes back, and it does so field by field. An agent has everything it needs to call this tool correctly and use its output downstream.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing to document and nothing is missing. The description's listing of returned fields is a substitute for the absent output schema rather than a parameter explanation.

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 specific verb+resource: it returns an amoCRM/Kommo account summary, enumerating exactly what comes back (name, currency, managers with id/name/e-mail, all pipelines with stage ids and names). This identifies it clearly against siblings that operate on leads, contacts, tasks or reports.

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?

"Вызывайте первым" gives an explicit ordering instruction and the reason behind it: pipeline, stage and manager ids are required by the other tools for filtering and deal creation. It also states the read-only nature, leaving no ambiguity about when this lookup is the right call.

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