get_gig_reviews

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that only the first page (5-10 reviews) is returned, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or other behavioral aspects like error handling.

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 that are front-loaded and efficient. The note about first page and the args format provide necessary detail without waste.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is almost complete. It covers input format and a key pagination behavior. Minor gap: no mention of error cases or prerequisites.

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 parameter 'url' is explained with a format example and allowance for path, adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Get reviews for a Fiverr gig' using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings like get_gig_details or get_seller_profile by focusing exclusively on reviews.

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 implies when to use (when you need reviews) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. Context from sibling tools provides some differentiation, but no explicit guidance is given.

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