Discogs: get marketplace listing

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which covers the safety profile. The description adds the scoping detail that it fetches a single listing by ID, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, error behavior, or rate limits. With annotations covering the main concern, this is adequate but not additive.

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, contains no fluff, and effectively communicates the tool's purpose. It is concise without being under-specified as a tautology.

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 get-by-ID tool with readOnly annotation and no output schema, the description provides the core information. However, it omits any indication of the response content or when to use it relative to list/search tools, making it minimally sufficient.

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 0%, but the description clarifies that listing_id is the identifier used to fetch the listing. It does not explain the optional currency parameter, which remains undocumented. This partial compensation earns a mid score.

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 uses the verb 'Fetch' with resource 'marketplace listing' and specifies 'single' and 'by its listing ID', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like discogs_get_seller_inventory or discogs_search. It directly states the tool's core function.

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 when you have a specific listing ID and need its details, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over discogs_get_seller_inventory or search, nor does it state any exclusions. Context is implied rather than explicit.

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