ebay_get_email_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states the basic function and does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, required permissions, rate limits, or what side effects (e.g., mark 'previewed') occur. For a read-like operation, this is insufficient.

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 very short (one sentence of 8 words). While it is concise, it is too minimal to be informative. Important details such as the purpose of the parameter, output format, and when to use are missing. The brevity comes at the expense of clarity and completeness.

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?

Considering the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is inadequate. There is no information about the return value (e.g., preview HTML, plain text, subject line), whether the preview is generated on-the-fly or cached, or any prerequisites (e.g., campaign must be in draft state). For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description should provide more context to help an agent understand the expected response and 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 input schema has one parameter 'emailCampaignId' with a description that is merely a tautology ('required endpoint parameter'). The tool description does not clarify the meaning or purpose of this parameter beyond what the schema already states. It could explain that it is the unique identifier of the email campaign to preview, but it adds no value.

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 'Get email preview through the eBay Marketing API,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It clearly indicates the tool retrieves a preview of an email campaign, distinguishing it from siblings like 'ebay_get_email_campaign' (which gets campaign details) and 'ebay_get_email_report' (which gets performance data). However, it lacks detail on what exactly the preview contains (e.g., HTML rendering, subject line).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't explain that this should be used when a visual preview of an email campaign is needed, as opposed to using 'ebay_get_email_campaign' to fetch campaign settings or 'ebay_get_email_report' for analytics. There is no mention of prerequisites or context.

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