alt_sold_listings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does well: it reveals the data is credential-free public data from Alt's own backend, covers a rolling recent window, is aggregated across auction houses, and is not a filtered view of live listings. It does not mention return shape or pagination behavior, but for a read-only search this is sufficient context.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then scope distinction, filter pointer, and data provenance. No filler, though the parenthetical marketing phrase adds slight length without much operational value.

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?

Covers data scope (completed, rolling window, cross-auction-house), authentication status, and sibling differentiation, with schema handling parameters. The only true gap is no description of the response format or pagination behavior, which is not required in the description but would help an agent consuming the data.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds only a pointer to alt-categories for accepted enum values and restates the auction_house=Alt behavior already present in the schema, so it does not significantly extend parameter meaning.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Search Alt's completed sales archive') and elaborates that it covers completed card sales aggregated across all source auction houses. It explicitly distinguishes itself from alt-search/alt-auctions as a separate index, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings.

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?

States the tool is a separate index from alt-search/alt-auctions and is scoped to a rolling recent time window, not live listings — clear when-not guidance. It also gives a concrete filter condition ('Pass auction_house=Alt...') and points to alt-categories for accepted enum values.

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