firestarter_set_developer_margin

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description explains that the change is not retroactive (existing orders keep their frozen margin), that zero disables the margin, and that there is a transaction ceiling. This tells the agent what side effects to expect and what is not affected.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core verb and noun, and every following clause adds a distinct fact (prospective effect, zero-off, ceiling, sibling distinction). It could be split into shorter sentences but is still efficient.

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?

With a single parameter and annotations already conveying read/write/destructive/idempotent traits, this description covers the practical edge cases: future-only application, turning off with 0, the 10%/$50 ceiling, and the distinction from market share_bps. Nothing essential is missing for correct 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?

Although the schema already documents margin_percent fully (0–10, conversion to bps), the description adds operational meaning: it is a markup on the item total, only for purchases through the org's own API keys, and subject to a platform ceiling. This enriches the bare schema definition.

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?

States a specific verb 'Set or change' and a precise resource 'developer margin', defines what that margin is, and explicitly contrasts itself with firestarter_create_market's share_bps. No ambiguity about what action is performed.

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?

Gives condition-based guidance: the margin applies to future purchases only, 0 turns it off, and it is explicitly contrasted with a different concept (share_bps in firestarter_create_market), steering the agent away from the wrong sibling. The examples clarify when a user would request this.

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