Bestand und Varianten eines Listings abrufen

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 clearly signals a read-only operation ('Liest') and discloses the exact data scope (variants, SKUs, prices per variant, stock). It does not cover auth, rate limits, or response format, but for a low-risk read tool with no side effects, this is adequate.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first states exactly what the tool reads, and the second provides a practical use case. There is no redundant information or filler, making it highly efficient.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is sufficiently complete: it names the data elements returned and a real-world purpose. It does not detail the response structure, but the listed data points largely compensate for the missing output schema.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter listing_id, including a pattern and a description ('Numerische Etsy Listing-ID'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond referring to 'ein Listing', so it relies entirely on the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Liest' (reads) and precisely defines the resource: variants, SKUs, prices per variant, and inventory for a listing. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling write tools like etsy_update_inventory and from etsy_get_listing, which likely focuses on general listing details.

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 a concrete use case: 'Wichtig für Analysen zu fehlenden SKUs oder niedrigen Beständen' (important for analyzing missing SKUs or low stock). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the stated analytical context is clear enough to guide tool selection.

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