Listing-Felder bearbeiten (Stufe 2)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It discloses that changes require ETSY_WRITE_ENABLED=true and that dry_run:true (default) only shows a preview (alt→neu), implying that dry_run:false actually mutates data. It could have explicitly mentioned the confirm requirement, but the schema covers that.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and exclusions. Every word earns its place; no redundant information.

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 tool with 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: field scope, exclusions, a prerequisite, and a preview mechanism. It does not address response format or the explicit confirmation workflow (though the schema documents confirm), so it is not fully complete but adequate.

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 only 27%, so the description adds crucial meaning by mapping parameter groups to human-readable German fields (e.g., 'Kategorie' for taxonomy_id, 'Herstellungsangaben' for who_made/when_made/is_supply). However, it does not explain individual constraints or value formats, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicitly states what the tool changes ('Ändert Titel, Beschreibung, Materialien, Shop-Section, Kategorie oder Herstellungsangaben') and also specifies what it does NOT change (price, inventory, tags, status), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like etsy_update_price and etsy_update_tags.

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 says NOT to use for price/inventory/tags/status and points to separate tools ('dafür gibt es eigene Tools'). It also states the prerequisite ETSY_WRITE_ENABLED=true and the default dry_run preview behavior, giving clear when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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