etsy_listing

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns specific fields and implicitly indicates a read-only retrieval operation. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior, which would be useful for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 short and front-loaded, with two sentences that clearly state the action and the output. However, it is slightly redundant as 'Etsy listing detail' appears in both sentences, which could be merged into a single more efficient sentence.

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 simple retrieval tool with a single required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists the key returned fields, and the input schema defines the ID parameter. While it lacks usage context and edge-case handling, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly for a straightforward listing lookup.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the 'id' parameter clearly described as 'Numeric Etsy listing id'. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 'Get Etsy listing detail' and enumerates the returned fields (title, price, images, materials, tags, and shop), making the tool's purpose easy to understand. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like etsy_listing_reviews or etsy_shop_listings, which also deal with listing-related data.

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 the tool is for retrieving a single Etsy listing's details by ID, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as etsy_search or etsy_shop_listings. There is no mention of exclusions or recommended use cases, leaving the context to be inferred.

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