Discogs: get seller inventory

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, covering safety. The description adds the default username behavior, which is useful scoping context, but provides no other behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or response structure. This adds some value beyond annotations, consistent with a 3.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose without extraneous text. Every word contributes, making it highly concise.

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?

The tool has six optional parameters and no output schema, yet the description omits any mention of pagination, filtering, sorting, or response characteristics. While the read-only annotation is present, the description is too sparse to give a complete picture for a listing endpoint.

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?

Only the username parameter has a schema description. The tool description does not explain page, sort, status, per_page, or sort_order. With schema coverage at 17%, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters, leaving the agent to infer meanings from enums alone.

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 a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'marketplace listings' and scope 'for a given Discogs username', distinguishing it from singular listing tools like discogs_get_listing. It also notes the default behavior, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like discogs_get_listing or discogs_create_listing. It does not mention exclusions or scenarios, leaving selection to the agent based on the tool name alone.

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