ebay_create_or_replace_sku_location_mapping

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

No annotations are provided, leaving the description to fully convey behavioral traits. The description does not disclose important details such as whether the operation is idempotent (create or replace implies upsert behavior), whether it overwrites existing mappings, or any side effects. It also lacks information about required permissions beyond the OAuth scope.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences plus a required OAuth scope note. It avoids unnecessary words and is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could benefit from a more structured format (e.g., separating purpose from requirements) to improve readability.

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 description is minimal and does not cover behavioral aspects like return values (no output schema exists), error conditions, or idempotency. Given the tool's complexity (requires multiple parameters, nested objects), more context is needed for an AI agent to use it correctly without additional knowledge.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, but it does align by mentioning 'Maps a SKU to multiple fulfillment center locations', which corresponds to the locationMapping parameter. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is high.

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 tool's function: 'Create or replace SKU location mapping for a listing.' It specifies the resource (SKU location mapping), the action (create or replace), and the scope (for a listing, maps to multiple fulfillment center locations). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ebay_delete_sku_location_mapping, which performs a different operation on the same resource.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the required OAuth scope, but does not explain when to create vs replace, or how this tool relates to other inventory management tools (e.g., ebay_create_or_replace_inventory_item). There is no indication of prerequisites or conditions for use.

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