List Listing Changes for a Seller

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotation by explaining the paginated response shape, the per-item fields, and how includeCorrelations: true attaches ranking/conversion impact.

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 a single dense paragraph that front-loads the use case, then systematically covers prerequisites, filtering/sorting options, the optional correlation flag, and the exact return fields. Every sentence adds operational value without restating the schema verbatim.

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?

With 13 parameters, no output schema, and only a readOnlyHint annotation, this description carries the full burden of explaining invocation. It covers required args, filter/sort semantics, output fields, pagination metadata, and the conditional correlation object, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to select and call the tool 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% with descriptions on every parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping parameters into filters, sorting, and correlation, and by linking sellerId to the discovery tool list_seller_profiles. It also explains the output structure, which helps when selecting includeCorrelations.

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 opens with 'Use this when the user asks what changed on their Amazon listings — price, content, or image edits', which clearly identifies the action (list changes) and the resource (seller listing changes). It also distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like get_seller_catalog and list_seller_profiles by focusing on changes over time.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user asks what changed on their Amazon listings') and gives concrete prerequisites: requires sellerId + marketplace and points to list_seller_profiles for discovery. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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