vestiaire_seller

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states this is public data sourced from Vestiaire's own profile page, which conveys the read-only nature and data source. However, it does not disclose whether the data is live or cached, any rate limits, or what happens if the seller is not found. These are minor for a simple public profile fetch, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 and efficient: a one-sentence purpose, a single instruction on the id parameter, and a note on data source. No wasted words, and the most important information (what it returns and how to get the id) is front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explicitly lists the returned fields (username, country, segment, counts), which covers what an agent would expect. The single parameter is fully explained, and the public data note covers authorization concerns. It lacks only edge-case behaviors (e.g., error handling), which is acceptable for a simple read tool.

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% (only parameter 'id' is described as 'Seller id'), and the description adds concrete guidance on what values to use for `id` (numeric seller id from related endpoints). This goes slightly beyond schema, but its minimal nature doesn't warrant more than baseline 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?

Description clearly states it returns a Vestiaire Collective seller's public storefront profile, listing the exact data fields (username, country, segment, counts). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like vestiaire_search, vestiaire_product, and vestiaire_search_sellers, making it easy for an agent to identify this as the profile-specific tool.

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?

Provides explicit context on how to obtain the `id` parameter (from /vestiaire/search's seller_id or /vestiaire/product's seller.id), which is crucial for correct usage. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool, but the presence of sibling tools like vestiaire_search_sellers gives some implicit routing. A clear exclusion note would improve it.

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