grailed_seller

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 discloses that only ACTIVE listings are returned, mentions the pagination behavior via page/limit (implicitly), and states the error case for unknown usernames. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, or side effects, but since this is a read-only GET-like operation and the description is honest about the data scope, it covers the key behavior. It could further disclose whether results are sorted or if the profile includes stats, but for a simple fetch tool, this is above average.

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 compact—one main sentence with a few clauses plus a short note about the alternative. It front-loads the primary purpose, then adds the crucial caveat about sold listings and the alternative tool. There is no filler or repetition of schema details unnecessarily. The only minor issue is that the sentence is a bit long, but it remains readable and to the point.

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 that returns a seller profile and a page of listings, the description covers the important context: it explains the data scope (active only), how to obtain the username, the pagination defaults, and the alternative for sold history. No output schema is provided, so the description doesn't need to detail return fields, but it could mention the structure of the listing objects or whether the profile includes stats. The limitation and alternative are clearly stated, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for all three parameters (username, page, limit), so the schema already documents their basic meaning. The description adds value by explaining the source of the username field ('from a listing's own seller.username field or grailed.com/{username}') and clarifies that limit defaults to 24 and max 100 (though that is in the schema). It also contextualizes the page/limit as applying to the seller's listings. This goes beyond pure schema repetition, though it doesn't explain the exact format of the returned page. Given high schema coverage, this is strong.

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 starts with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Get a Grailed seller's profile and active listings.' It clearly specifies what is returned (profile plus a page of active listings) and names the exact resource (a Grailed seller). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly referencing grailed-sold-listings as the alternative for sold listings, and from other grailed tools (search, listing, etc.) by the scope of 'seller's shop view.' An agent can immediately understand what this tool does and how it differs from related endpoints.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: it is for a seller's active listings, and for broader sales-history lookups the agent should use grailed-sold-listings with a designer/query filter. It also explains the key limitation ('sold listings are not filterable by seller through this endpoint') and notes that an unknown username returns a typed not-found error. This is explicit routing to the correct alternative tool under a specific condition, leaving no ambiguity about when to choose this over siblings.

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