ebay_delete_package

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

No annotations provided, and the description only says 'Delete', which implies a destructive operation. It does not disclose whether the deletion is reversible, what happens to associated data, or any required permissions. The description fails to add behavioral context beyond the inherent meaning of 'delete'.

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 sentence but is under-specification; it is too minimal to be helpful. While concise, it fails to provide necessary context, making it insufficient for the agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is the sole source of context. It is too brief to fully inform the agent about the tool's behavior, especially as a mutating operation. The tool is simple, but the description does not cover side effects or return behavior.

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 has 0% description coverage for the parameter 'packageId'. The description merely says 'by ID', adding no meaningful explanation of what a package ID is, how to obtain it, or its format. The agent gets no additional value from the description beyond the parameter name.

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) and resource (a package) and identifies by ID. However, it does not elaborate on what deletion entails (e.g., permanent vs reversible), which could be inferred but not explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_package and clone_package by using 'delete'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cancel_package or bulk_delete_packages. No prerequisites or side effects are mentioned, leaving the agent to rely solely on the tool name.

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