real_time_ebay_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. However, it does not disclose any non-obvious behavior such as data freshness, rate limits, authentication, or output structure. The operation labels like 'Product Search' simply restate the operation names without adding meaningful context beyond what is already evident.

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 concise and well-structured, opening with a clear summary and then presenting each operation in a consistent, scannable format. Every sentence contributes meaning, and the list of operations with parameters is easy to parse with no redundant text.

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?

This is a multi-operation tool with no output schema and no annotations, leaving the description to provide complete context. It successfully covers operations and required parameters, but omits any information about return data, error behavior, or operational constraints. For complex usage, an agent would need more details about what to expect from each operation.

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 only defines a generic 'args' object, so the description adds significant value by specifying the required parameter for each operation (query, category_id, product_id, seller_id). While it does not provide types or formats, the parameter names are self-explanatory and directly tied to their operations, compensating for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'eBay product search, products by category, product details and seller feedback across eBay domains,' using specific verbs and resources. It enumerates four distinct operations, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like realtime_amazon_data and real_time_walmart_data by focusing on eBay.

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 explains how to invoke the tool ('set operation... put its parameters in args') and lists required parameters for each operation, but it does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives or state when not to use it. Usage is implied by the eBay-specific scope, but there is no direct guidance for choosing between this and sibling data tools.

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