Build a seller-facing sourcing pack report with market validation, Korea source-backed price context, target-market competition checks, listing export handoff, risk notes, and paid report path. No checkout, physical purchase, shipping, or profit guarantee.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | ||
| category | No | ||
| target_market | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so description must carry full burden. It lists report contents and what it does not do, but fails to disclose side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or output format. The description is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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 sentence plus a short clarifying sentence. It is relatively concise with no redundant information, though could be better structured with bullet points.
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?
Given 3 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It explains the report's content but not how to use parameters, what the return value is, or any prerequisites. The tool's purpose is clear but operational details are missing.
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?
Input schema has 3 parameters (format, category, target_market) with no descriptions and 0% schema coverage. The description gives no information about what these parameters mean, valid values, or how they affect the report. This is a critical gap.
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?
Description clearly states the tool builds a 'sourcing pack report' with specific components (market validation, price context, competition checks, etc.). The verb 'Build' is specific and the resource is well-defined, though sibling differentiation is not explicit.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The 'No checkout, physical purchase, shipping, or profit guarantee' provides a negative boundary but lacks positive usage context or alternative suggestions.
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.