delist_offer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral consequence of releasing locked escrow, which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not mention reversibility, permissions, or what happens to the offer after deactivation.

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 a single, efficient sentence of 12 words. It front-loads the action and includes the key side effect with no filler.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and a critical consequence (escrow release). It could be improved by mentioning reversibility or return value, but it is generally adequate for a simple operation.

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%, with both parameters already documented. The description adds little beyond a general sense of ownership ('your own offer'), which is already implied by the schema's 'Owner's external user ID'. Thus baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool delists (deactivates) the user's own offer and releases escrow, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from 'delete_offer' by using 'deactivate' and restricting to 'your own offer'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_offer or delete_offer. The description only states the action itself, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context, with no exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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