Get live listings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: each marketplace capture is billed, and a listing disappearing is not proof of a sale, which prevents an important misinterpretation.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and uses three efficient sentences with no filler. Every sentence adds value: what is returned, the billing implication, and the sold/delisted/repriced caveat.

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 read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it enumerates the returned fields, ordering, billing implication, and interpretation caveat. It would be stronger if it explicitly positioned itself against compare_prices and get_seat_map, but the essential call context is present.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds useful output/ordering context such as all-in price per ticket and cheapest first, but it does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: it returns every live listing on one marketplace event page, with concrete fields like section, row, seats, prices, and ordering. This is easy to distinguish from list_marketplaces, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with compare_prices or get_seat_map, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied by the scope: one event page URL, live listings, cheapest first. The schema mentions that the URL comes from find_events or the user, but the description itself gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives such as compare_prices or get_seat_map.

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