ozon_list_sections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It clearly explains behavior: returns sections grouped by api, includes section name, tag, and method count, and covers both seller and performance APIs. It does not mention auth or side effects, but the listing nature and zero parameters make those less 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?

Three short sentences: purpose, usage, and output structure. The primary action is front-loaded, and every sentence carries useful information without padding.

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 tool's low complexity, zero parameters, and available output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent when to use it, what it lists, and how the result is structured. Nothing important is missing for selecting and invoking it 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description correctly adds no parameter-related confusion and earns the zero-parameter baseline of 4.

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 and resource: 'List all Ozon API sections' with explicit scope ('Seller + Performance') and output ('method counts'). The description makes the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinct from focused sibling tools like ozon_get_section.

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 explicit entry-point guidance: 'Use this first to orient yourself in the API.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but for a zero-parameter orientation tool this is sufficient context.

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