firestarter_market_preview

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

The annotations already mark it read-only, open-world, and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: it shows the signed-out visitor view, lists both market surfaces, notes that listing_ids are accepted by firestarter_execute, and explicitly debunks the assumption that joining grants discounts or cashback. This goes well beyond the annotation signal without contradicting it.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and returns, then proceeds to usage and expectations. It is longer than strictly necessary, especially the detailed fee/discount explanation, but every sentence carries behavioral or routing value and there is no filler or repetition.

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 one-parameter read-only preview with an output schema present, the description covers when to call it, what it returns, how the result connects to purchase via listing_id, and the key caveats about joining and discounts. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and interpret the result appropriately.

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 100%, and the schema parameter already explains that `code` is 'The community's share code or vanity handle'. The description repeats this idea and gives the URL context, but does not add material new semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the high-coverage baseline of 3 applies.

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: 'Preview a community market BEFORE joining', with a precise output contract (name, tagline, curated shelf, own listings). It also names the handle-based URL and distinguishes the read-only preview from the separate join step, so an agent can tell this apart from firestarter_join_market and firestarter_preview.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool: 'Use when a buyer pastes a market code/link or asks ...'. It also clarifies when not to treat joining as required, noting that items are buyable without joining and that joining is a separate optional step, which prevents the agent from calling firestarter_join_market unnecessarily.

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