ebay_get_custom_policy

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It merely restates the action ('Get') without disclosing return format, error behavior, rate limits, or any side effects. Since annotations already cover safety, the bar is lower, but the description itself contributes no additional behavioral transparency beyond the annotation.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It directly states the action and the scope without any filler or redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter, read-only getter, the description plus schema and annotation are largely sufficient. The agent knows the tool's purpose and the required input. It is less than perfect because it does not mention what is returned (e.g., the policy object) or any error conditions, but the low complexity keeps this a minor gap.

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% (customPolicyId is described as 'The custom policy ID'), so the schema already fully documents the only parameter. The description's 'by ID' phrasing adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies with no extra credit.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific custom policy by ID'), making it clearly distinct from the plural-list sibling ebay_get_custom_policies and from create/update/delete counterparts. The 'by ID' qualifier precisely scopes the operation, so an agent can tell it apart without needing to open the schema.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling getters, especially ebay_get_custom_policies (which lists policies). There is no stated alternative, prerequisite, or condition like 'use this when you have a policy ID.' Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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