yandex_metrica_list_goals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description usefully adds what the payload contains (goal id and type), but says nothing about pagination, count limits, or permission requirements on the counter.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the purpose stated first and the routing constraint second. Every clause earns its place.

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 single-parameter read-only list tool with a complete annotation set and no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger, exclusion, alternative, and return fields. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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% and the single counter_id parameter is fully documented in the schema as the 'Yandex Metrica counter (tag) ID'. The description's phrase 'one Yandex Metrica counter' merely confirms the unit of scope rather than adding format or constraint detail, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (conversion goals on one counter) and even names the returned fields (goal id and type). An agent can distinguish this from yandex_metrica_list_counters or yandex_metrica_get_counter without opening any schema.

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?

Gives both a positive trigger ('when the user asks which goals exist on a counter before building a report') and an explicit exclusion ('Do not use this for conversion counts or rates'), routing the agent to the named alternative yandex_metrica_get_report. Nothing is left to inference.

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