firestarter_delist

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-read-only behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: it specifies a soft delete, states that buyers' agents can no longer find or buy the product, and notes that the share link goes dark. It does not disclose reversibility or permission requirements, but with annotations present, the added behavioral detail is strong.

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 sentences with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded in the first phrase, followed by a clear consequence. Every sentence contributes useful behavioral information.

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 single-parameter mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the resource, the action, the soft-delete nature, and the immediate visible effects. It lacks only minor details like return behavior or whether the action is reversible, but those are not critical for invoking the tool correctly.

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 schema already documents the only parameter (listing_id) with 100% coverage. The description adds the 'your listings' ownership nuance, but does not expand on the parameter format beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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: 'Remove one of your listings from the network'. It also clarifies the semantic of a soft delete, which is more specific than just 'delete' and distinguishes it from other listing-related operations. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the resource and effect are clear enough to identify this as the delist tool.

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 explains what the tool does and the immediate market effect, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as updating a listing, canceling an order, or deleting a ship-from location. No when-not-to-use conditions or alternative tool names are given.

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