horizon_torn_getMarketItemMarketItem

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

With no annotations and a one-line description, there is no disclosure of behavioral traits like pagination, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 very concise (one sentence), but it lacks substance. It earns its place minimally but could be expanded to provide more value without being verbose.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, market domain, many siblings), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what listings are returned, how parameters affect results, or how it differs from other market tools. No output schema further reduces completeness.

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 description coverage is 71% (5 of 7 parameters described), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but it also doesn't contradict it.

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 'Get item market listings' clearly states the action (Get) and the resource (item market listings), but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like horizon_torn_getMarketAuctionHouse or horizon_torn_getMarketBazaar, which also deal with market listings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as market auction house or bazaar tools. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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