ebay_bulk_delete_ads_by_inventory_reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a destructive operation ('Delete') and a constraint, but lacks details on side effects, transaction semantics, or error handling, which are important for a bulk operation.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity (nested parameters, bulk operation) and lack of output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits important context such as return format, synchronous vs asynchronous behavior, partial success handling, and error conditions.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the purpose ('by inventory reference') and the campaign type constraint, which are not evident from schema 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 clearly states the action ('Delete multiple ads') and the resource ('by inventory reference'), and further distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'CPS campaigns only', 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 provides a clear usage constraint ('CPS campaigns only'), which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or offer alternatives like the singular delete tool.

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