Build the commercial operator playbook: what to deploy, where to list, what the user must do, offer stack, proof links, and guardrails. Does not post, submit, DM, invoice, collect payment, change accounts, or activate Paddle.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| usd_krw | No | ||
| target_krw | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description clarifies non-actions (e.g., does not post, submit, DM), which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose behavioral details like side effects, system modifications, or what 'building' entails (e.g., creating a file or returning data). With no annotations, the burden is high, and this is only partially met.
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 concise with one clear sentence and a list of excluded actions. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Minor improvement could be structuring the components list more clearly.
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?
While the tool's high-level purpose is stated, the complete lack of parameter documentation and no output schema leaves the tool under-specified. An agent cannot reliably invoke the tool without understanding the parameters, which are critical for context.
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 input schema has 0% description coverage for both parameters ('usd_krw' and 'target_krw'), and the description provides no explanation of their meaning or how they relate to building a commercial playbook. This leaves the agent guessing about parameter usage.
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 clearly states the tool builds a commercial operator playbook and lists its components (deploy, list, user actions, etc.), distinguishing it from other 'build_*' tools by specifying a unique resource. It is a specific verb+resource combination with explicit inclusions.
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 indicates what the tool does and explicitly lists actions it does not perform, implying usage boundaries. However, it lacks guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling 'build_*' tools, such as 'build_buyer_discovery_queue' or 'build_cash_sprint_packet'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but create_buy_ship_cart_order and create_direct_buy_ship_order are nearly identical, causing potential confusion. Additionally, build_buyer_discovery_queue and build_cash_sprint_packet overlap in targeting buyer segments.
All tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (build_, get_, create_, search_) with consistent snake_case, making it easy to infer functionality from the name.
With 26 tools covering diverse domains (stock market, real estate, tourism, sourcing, etc.), the scope feels broad and somewhat bloated. A more focused set would improve coherence.
The tool set covers many aspects of Korea data and seller workflows, but notable gaps exist: no tools for actual listing posting, sending communications, or completing transactions, as many build_ tools explicitly exclude those steps.