list_allowed_stores

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses hard behavioral constraints (must shop only on the allowlist, never invent a shop, never open random websites) and testMode effects on store visibility and gray-coin spending. It could go further on return format or failure behavior, but core behavioral disclosure is strong.

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?

Every sentence carries operational weight: purpose, safety rule, trigger phrases, alternative routing, and testMode behavior. It is slightly dense, but the structure is front-loaded and none of the sentences are filler.

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 no-required-parameter list tool, the description is nearly complete: it covers when to use it, what to avoid, and mode-dependent behavior. The main gap is the lack of any mention of the return shape or contents, especially since no output schema is provided.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The 'need' parameter is already described in the schema with 'Optional topic. Prefer peek_stores for a quiet offer.' The description does not add further semantic detail about this parameter, which is acceptable because the schema already covers it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List stores on this agent's allowlist.' It also clarifies the tool's role as the authorized shopping source, which distinguishes it from search-oriented siblings like peek_stores and search_products.

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?

Explicit trigger phrases are given ('магазин', 'где можно потратить', etc.), and an explicit alternative is named: for 'найди'/'сравни'/'подбери' call peek_stores first. The testMode distinction also tells the agent when this list represents test stores only.

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