whatnot_live

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the data is public and sourced from Whatnot's GraphQL API, which implies read-only and external API constraints, but it does not disclose potential rate limits, pagination behavior, or error handling for invalid/live show IDs. This meets only the baseline.

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, but the first two sentences are somewhat redundant ('Get a Whatnot live show's current shop feed' and 'Returns a Whatnot live show's current shop feed'). It could be tightened, but overall it remains concise and informative.

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 single-parameter tool without an output schema, the description adequately explains the return content (products, auctions, giveaways with seller ratings) and data source. It does not mention what happens if the show is not live, but given the low complexity, it is largely complete.

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 description coverage is 100% (the 'id' parameter is well-described as the Whatnot live show ID, e.g. from browse results). The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 the tool fetches a Whatnot live show's current shop feed, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It lists contents (products, auctions, giveaways, seller ratings) and distinguishes from sibling tools like whatnot_browse and whatnot_categories by focusing on a live show's feed.

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 provides clear context: the tool requires a live show ID, and the parameter description mentions it comes from a browse result, implying a workflow with whatnot_browse. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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