get_terminals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. A 'поиск' (search) operation is implicitly read-only, and the description states it operates on a specified city. However, it does not disclose return format, whether results include address/phone/working hours, or if auth is required.

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?

One concise sentence that fully conveys the tool's purpose with zero waste. For a single-parameter tool with full schema coverage, this level of brevity is appropriate.

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 lookup tool with one documented parameter, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no other useful sibling tools nearby and no output schema, it could mention what terminal information is returned to help agents decide if this is the right tool.

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 parameter (city_id) is documented in the schema as 'ID города для поиска терминалов (из get_cities)'. The description adds minimal extra value since it just says 'в указанном городе' which largely repeats the schema's city parameter description.

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 it searches for DL terminals in a specified city, using a specific verb+resource+scope pattern. It distinguishes from siblings since none of them (calculate, track, create_order, get_order_history, get_cities) relate to terminal search.

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 implies usage—search terminals by city—but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives. There's no exclusion guidance or mention of related siblings, though the context (needs a city ID from get_cities) is implied by the schema.

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