ebay_get_document

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: no byte download, required sell.inventory scope, and the ACCEPTED status constraint. This enriches the agent's understanding without contradicting 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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds distinct information (usage constraint, no-download, auth scope). There is no redundant or filler content.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and a readOnly annotation, and the description covers core purpose, auth, and no-download behavior. However, with no output schema, it does not explain what metadata/status fields are returned, error behavior, or how to obtain documentId, leaving important details to inference.

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 0% description coverage for documentId, and the description does not mention the parameter at all. It fails to compensate for the schema gap—no explanation of what documentId is, how to obtain it, or its format. The agent is left with only the parameter name to infer meaning.

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?

States a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource: 'listing document metadata and processing status'. It also distinguishes itself from download tools by explicitly stating 'Does not download document bytes', which is a meaningful sibling differentiation.

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?

Provides some usage context: 'Only ACCEPTED documents may be attached to listings' and 'Requires sell.inventory'. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when to use this tool versus others, leaving the when-not-to-use guidance mostly implied by the no-download clause.

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