tgtrack_get_integration_script

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

No annotations provided, so the description takes full burden. While it notes 'без запроса к API' (no API request), which is a key behavioral insight, it does not disclose permissions, side effects, or state changes. However, for a read-like tool, the no-API-request detail is significant transparency.

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?

Single sentence conveying core functionality without verbosity. Could improve by front-loading the result type, but remains efficient.

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?

No output schema and no description of return value format. The agent cannot determine whether the result is a string, object, or file. For a tool assembling something, output details are critical.

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 has 100% description coverage for both parameters (linkID and counterID). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'собрать' (assemble) and identifies the resource as a landing script and click link. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tgtrack_get_landings' (likely returns list) by specifying assembly of ready-made script.

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 on when to use or when to avoid this tool. No mention of alternatives among siblings. The description only states what it does, not the context of use.

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