get_listing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that the tool is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description only outlines return fields, not behavioral traits.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose ('Details for one marketplace listing'). No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple retrieval tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is adequately complete. It lists the key return fields. However, it could mention error conditions (e.g., invalid listing_id) or additional context, but given the low complexity, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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% and the schema already describes the parameter (listing_id from search_listings). The description does not add additional meaning or context for the parameter beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3.

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?

Description clearly states it returns details for one marketplace listing and lists the specific data fields (price, value assessment vs WatchCharts estimate, source site, posting date, external URL). It distinguishes from siblings like search_listings (which returns multiple listings) and get_listings_history (historical data).

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 usage for retrieving details of a single listing but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., search_listings for finding listings, get_watch_info for watch details). No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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