firestarter_set_market_picks

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the burden of behavioral detail. It does this thoroughly by explaining how 'replace' becomes the exact shelf in order, what 'add' and 'remove' do, and that own listings are rejected. It also states the 15-pick limit and the visible note, giving a clear picture of side effects on the shelf.

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 long but densely informative: it front-loads the core purpose, then covers the actions, constraints, and related tools without repetition. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure helps an agent quickly extract the essential behavior.

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 rich input schema and an output schema, this description still covers all situational gaps: ownership requirement, source of listing IDs, behavior of each action, ordering semantics, tier gating, and the key 'own listings are rejected' rule. The agent can invoke it correctly with this single description.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes far beyond structured fields. It clarifies the meaning of 'replace' (exact shelf and order), 'remove' (only listing_id used), the 'min_tier' mechanic ('members get first look at new picks'), and the 'note' purpose. This adds genuine operational insight above what the JSON Schema states.

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 action and target resource: curate the 'Recommends' shelf for a community market the agent/owner has access to. It also clearly distinguishes picks as other sellers' listings and says own listings are rejected, making the purpose precise and easily differentiated from sibling market tools.

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 tells the agent when to use the tool: 'Use when an owner wants to add, remove, reorder, or replace what their community recommends.' It also provides exclusions ('your OWN listings... are rejected here') and even points to a related tool for tier setup (firestarter_set_market_tiers), which helps route the agent.

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