Кабинет продавца WB: продажи

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

The annotations mark the tool as read-only and open-world, and the description adds practical constraints beyond them: the API token category and the rate limit. It does not contradict the annotations and gives the agent useful runtime expectations.

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 compact sentences: the first front-loads the tool's purpose and outputs, the second covers auth and rate-limit requirements. Every phrase earns its place and there is no redundancy.

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 output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned metrics (quantity, buyer payment, seller payout, top SKUs by revenue) and includes the operational constraints. It could mention pagination or exact response shape, but for selection and invocation the key context is present.

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%, with date_from and date_to already documented including defaults and date format. The description only says 'за период' and adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 identifies the resource — seller sales and returns over a period — and lists concrete outputs (counts, buyer payments, seller payout, top SKUs by revenue). It is distinct from sibling tools like wb_seller_orders or wb_reviews, though it lacks an explicit action verb such as 'fetch' or 'list'.

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 provides operational guidance (required WB_API_TOKEN with 'Статистика' category and a 1-request-per-minute rate limit), so an agent knows what to prepare before calling. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over the sibling tools or mention exclusion cases.

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