generate_listing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the output components but does not state whether the tool has side effects, requires special permissions, or returns structured data. This is a significant transparency gap for a generation tool.

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 two short paragraphs, with the purpose front-loaded and an Args section for parameters. Every sentence adds information, and there is no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description only partially compensates by listing the package components. It omits details about the return format, the exact relationship between the two IDs, and any prerequisites beyond 'from a generate_* tool', leaving some ambiguity for invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It adds meaningful context: product_idea_id is 'the originating product idea ID' and generated_product_id is 'the ID of the generated product (from a generate_* tool)', which goes beyond the bare schema fields and helps the agent source the correct IDs.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Generate the full SEO/listing package (title, description, keywords, tags, social copy) for a product.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like generate_keywords and generate_tags, which produce only individual components.

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 argument description for generated_product_id ('from a generate_* tool') implies that this should be used after a product is generated, providing ordering context. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over individual component generators or give any when-not-to-use guidance, stopping short of a 5.

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