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

Annotations already declare this as read-only and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that only active listings are returned and what content is included, but it does not cover edge cases such as invalid or inactive listing IDs.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no filler. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the content details follow efficiently.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete: it names the resource, its active-state constraint, and the key return fields. It could mention what happens when a listing is not found or inactive, but that is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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% and the description does not explain the listing_id parameter format, source, or how to obtain it. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond what the schema property name already conveys.

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 ('get'), a specific resource ('one active AgentLot listing'), and enumerates the key data returned (price, seller reputation, input/output schemas). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_listings, which find or list multiple listings.

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 clearly implies this is the tool for retrieving a single specific active listing by ID, which gives an agent context on when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the singular 'one active listing' provides sufficient usage context.

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