Listings aktivieren (Stufe 2)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does add useful context about the dry_run default and confirm_bulk requirement for bulk actions. However, it omits the crucial requirement that confirm:true is needed for actual execution (dry_run:false), relying on the schema to convey this. This is a significant behavioral gap.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the primary action and then add the two most important caveats (bulk confirmation and dry_run default). Every word earns its place with no fluff.

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?

While the description covers the core action and bulk behavior, it does not explain the overall execution flow (i.e., that confirm:true is required for any real change), nor does it mention return values or error conditions. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, this leaves some ambiguity for an agent invoking the 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?

The schema already provides detailed descriptions for 3 of 4 parameters (75% coverage), and the description's mentions of confirm_bulk and dry_run largely repeat schema information. The description does reinforce the relationship between bulk actions and confirm_bulk, but it does not add substantial new meaning beyond what the schema already documents.

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's purpose: setting one or more listings to 'active' status. It uses a specific verb ('Setzt den Status') and resource ('Listings'), and the tool name 'etsy_activate_listing' clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like etsy_deactivate_listing and etsy_update_listing.

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 for when to use the tool (to activate listings) and mentions key behaviors like bulk confirmation and dry-run preview. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or specify when not to use it, falling 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.