Сохранённые адреса

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return content (saved addresses with labels and details) and its relationship to set_address. It does not describe error conditions or explicit read-only behavior, but the verb 'Возвращает' and the non-mutating nature of a list operation are sufficiently clear.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences with no fluff. The main verb and resource are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds valuable cross-tool integration context.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what data it returns, and how it fits into the broader workflow (use with set_address). It is complete within its context.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter detail to explain. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter information since none exist.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: it returns saved delivery addresses from the account, including labels and details. The verb 'Возвращает' and resource 'сохранённые адреса' are specific, and the mention of set_address distinguishes it from address-related siblings.

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 provides clear usage context: it explains that returned addresses can be selected via set_address without re-entering them on the map. This implies when to use the tool (to retrieve saved addresses for later selection) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like get_address.

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