Retrieve an eBay seller's About tab data, including stats, top-rated status, location, member-since, and cleaned store categories, using the seller username.
Get eBay seller about details. Returns seller about information from the eBay store about tab, including seller stats, top-rated status, optional location/member-since fields, and cleaned store categories.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| seller | Yes | eBay seller username |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only getter and discloses the shape of the returned data (stats, top-rated status, optional location/member-since, categories), which is genuinely useful since there is no output schema. It does not mention permissions, auth, or rate limits.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the return contents. No filler, though the enumerations of return fields are somewhat list-like.
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 single-parameter getter with no annotations or output schema, the description supplies the return-field inventory which compensates for the missing output schema. Only the routing versus sibling seller tools is left to inference.
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% and the single 'seller' parameter is fully documented in the schema as 'eBay seller username'. The description adds no extra meaning about identifier format or handling, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 and resource ('Get eBay seller about details') plus the source ('from the eBay store about tab'). It is clear what the tool returns, but it never names or distinguishes itself from nearby siblings like ebay_seller, ebay_seller_feedback, or ebay_seller_shop.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus the other ebay_seller_* tools. The phrase 'about tab' hints at the scope, but the agent must infer that feedback/shop data lives in the sibling tools rather than here.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.