ebay_create_return_policy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any side effects, such as whether duplicate names cause errors, the scope of the policy (e.g., marketplace-specific), or default values for optional fields.

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 at one sentence, but it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. It is front-loaded but does not use the space effectively to convey necessary context.

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 of the nested 'policy' object with many fields and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain what a return policy is, how it applies to eBay listings, or what the response will contain.

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% coverage at the top level ('Return policy details'), but inner properties lack descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain the purpose or constraints of key fields like 'name', 'marketplaceId', or 'returnPeriod'.

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 'Create' and the resource 'return policy'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools such as ebay_get_return_policies, ebay_update_return_policy, and ebay_delete_return_policy.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, required parameters beyond the schema, or scenarios where creation would be inappropriate.

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