list_bots

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, which cover safety traits. However, the description adds no behavioral details such as pagination, response structure, or ordering, so it lacks sufficient transparency beyond the annotations.

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 extremely short but is an incomplete noun phrase rather than a proper sentence. While concise, it omits the verb and critical context, making it under-specified rather than efficiently structured.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description fails to clarify the tool's purpose or usage. For a four-parameter list operation, this is inadequate context for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 mention any of the four parameters (limit, compact, archived, is_pinned). The agent receives no semantic help beyond the parameter names and defaults.

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 'PM-боты в диалогах.' identifies the resource (PM bots in dialogs) but lacks an explicit verb like 'list' or 'fetch'. It does distinguish from sibling tools by scoping to private message bots, but the purpose is only clear when combined with the tool name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_pm_users or list_chats. The description gives no use cases, prerequisites, or contextual triggers.

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