ebay_get_customer_service_metric_tasks

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description adds the things annotations do not: the required scope sell.analytics.readonly and the mutually exclusive filter modes. It says nothing about result volume/ordering or what a returned task contains, but with the read-only profile covered, this is above the annotation baseline.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource, the fixed filter value, the exclusivity rule, the paging mechanism and the auth scope. No filler, no repetition, and the most important identifier comes first.

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?

With 5 fully documented parameters, no output schema and no nesting, the description covers what is needed to invoke the tool correctly: resource, filters, paging and permissions. Only minor gaps remain (whether feedType may be omitted, and ordering of results), which are not essential to a correct call.

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% — every parameter (limit, offset, feedType, dateRange, lookBackDays) already documents ranges, defaults and the 'do not combine' rule. The description restates the mutual exclusivity and mentions limit/offset paging but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List Feed API customer service metric report tasks') plus scope (feedType CUSTOMER_SERVICE_METRICS_REPORT) and paging/filter behavior. It is distinguishable from the singular ebay_get_customer_service_metric_task by the plural 'tasks' and listing semantics, though no sibling is named explicitly, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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?

Gives a clear usage constraint (filter by dateRange OR lookBackDays, not both) and the required OAuth scope (sell.analytics.readonly), which is real prerequisite context. It does not, however, route the agent between this listing tool and ebay_get_customer_service_metric_task / ebay_create_customer_service_metric_task, so no explicit alternatives are offered.

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