fanaticscollect_listing

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

With no annotations present, the description takes on the transparency burden and does disclose key behavioral traits: 'Credential-free public data from Fanatics Collect's own GraphQL API' addresses auth, and the conditional 'when the card is stored in Fanatics' vault' explains when grading metadata will appear. It does not mention rate limits or error behavior, but for a read-only detail endpoint this is adequate.

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 front-loaded with the core operation and then provides exactly the details an agent needs in the absence of an output schema: listing formats, returned fields, conditional metadata, and data source. No sentence is wasted.

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 two simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns, the listing types, the source, and auth requirements. It does not address error cases or rate limits, but these are not critical for a simple single-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?

While the schema already documents all parameters (100% coverage), the description adds meaning by mapping the enum values to real-world listing types: weekly-auction, premier-auction, and fixed-price 'buy now' (including Instant Rips packs). This helps an agent choose the correct type value.

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 Fanatics Collect listing detail.' Explicitly scopes to a single listing and enumerates the three accepted listing formats (weekly, premier, fixed-price), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like fanaticscollect_search or fanaticscollect_auctions.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving a single listing's detail, so an agent can infer it should be used when it already has a listing UUID. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the 'single listing' framing provides enough context to differentiate from list/search tools.

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