Прочитать данные WB

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds important context beyond that: arbitrary URL/method/header are forbidden, the result is only a preview with resultId, and pagination is not guaranteed complete.

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?

Four short sentences, each adding distinct information: the restriction, the return shape, the follow-up path, and the pagination caveat. It is front-loaded and has no 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?

With no output schema, it correctly explains the return value (preview + resultId) and the path to full results via wb_result. However, it leaves parameter semantics (params, maxAgeSeconds) undocumented, so an agent may still be uncertain how to construct a complete call.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only hints that operationId must come from a verified catalog. The params object and maxAgeSeconds are not explained at all, leaving the agent without semantics for two of the three parameters.

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 action—invoke a verified catalog operation—and clarifies what it returns (a limited preview plus resultId), explicitly distinguishing itself from wb_result. This is far more specific than the generic title and helps separate it from sibling tools.

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?

It says to call only operations from the verified catalog and directs users to wb_result for the full response. It also warns that this returns one page, not the whole dataset, so an agent knows when to use an alternative.

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