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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It usefully discloses that publishing happens in the owner's name, requires the publish permission, and adds a visible 'Published by an AI agent' badge. It does not disclose whether the publish is immediate, reversible, moderated, or what listing state changes occur after publishing.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the permission requirement. The badge sentence adds relevant visible-behavior context with no wasted wording.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It covers permission and badge visibility but leaves parameter expectations, publish side effects, and return behavior unexplained.

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 only 29%, so the description should compensate by explaining the required title, category, price_eur, and description parameters. It mentions none of the parameters and adds no meaning beyond the bare schema constraints and category enum.

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: publish a listing for sale in the owner's name. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling set_listing_status, which also affects listing state.

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 gives a prerequisite, requiring the publish permission, which helps decide whether the caller can use it. However, it does not say when to use this versus set_listing_status, my_listings, or other listing-related siblings, nor does it describe exclusions or lifecycle context.

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