ebay_get_exclude_shipping_locations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description goes further by disclosing what is returned (regions, countries, special locations such as PO Box, APO/FPO) and a behavioral localization rule (acceptLanguage changes the returned metadata for CA/BE). With no output schema, it responsibly fills the return-value gap, though it omits pagination or size details.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then localization guidance, then the downstream use. Every sentence carries information, though the acceptLanguage sentence partially overlaps the schema description.

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 read-only metadata lookup with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned and the localization edge cases. It does not describe response shape or structure in depth, but combined with full schema coverage and annotations it is largely sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents both parameters, including the exact acceptLanguage localization rules. The description restates the acceptLanguage codes and localization behavior, adding little beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (list) and resource (regions, countries and special locations a seller can exclude from shipping), scoped to a marketplace. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling lookup tools like ebay_get_shipping_locations or ebay_get_shipping_carriers without needing to open a 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?

Explicitly routes the agent downstream: it says to use the returned values when configuring fulfillment policies (ebay_create_fulfillment_policy), which tells the agent why and when this is called. It lacks any explicit exclusion or prerequisite statement (e.g. auth requirements), so not a full 5.

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