yd_metrika_goals_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only says 'List goals for a counter,' with no mention of authentication, read-only nature, pagination, or any side effects. For a simple list operation, more context would be helpful but not critical.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded and to the point. Every word serves a purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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?

Given the complexity (no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, goal structure, or any nuances. For an agent to use this tool effectively, more context is needed.

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 schema has one parameter (counter_id) with a description 'Counter ID.' The tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and no extra value is added.

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 'List goals for a counter.' It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (goals) with context (for a counter). It is distinct from sibling tools like yd_metrika_goal_create and yd_metrika_goal_delete, but does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among siblings, there are many other Metrika tools (e.g., yd_metrika_goal_create, yd_metrika_goal_update) but no usage context or exclusions are given.

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