depop_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the data source ('Public data sourced from Depop's own item pages'), the normalization behavior, and the conditional 'similar items' carousel. It doesn't cover rate limits or error cases, but for a read-style tool this is solid 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description fully compensates by listing all returned fields (description, photos, price, condition, brand, size, seller info) and noting the conditional carousel behavior. It also clarifies data sourcing, making the tool complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

The only parameter, 'slug', is fully described in the input schema ('Depop item URL slug, e.g. from a search result's id field'). The tool description adds no new parameter syntax or format details, so we rely on the schema's 100% coverage, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 opens with 'Get Depop item detail,' a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like depop_search and depop_shop. It further enumerates the exact fields returned, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description implies usage context by stating the slug comes 'from a search result's id field,' which tells the agent to use this tool after searching. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it misses explicit exclusions.

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