ebay_get_inventory_locations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the purpose without revealing that the operation is read-only, whether pagination is required (despite schema hints), or any authentication or rate-limit considerations. The description adds minimal value beyond the name.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description should ideally clarify what is returned (e.g., a list of location objects with IDs and details). It also omits any context about the scope of 'all' (e.g., all for the seller, all for the eBay ecosystem). While the tool is simple, the description leaves minor gaps in completeness.

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 already describes both parameters (limit and offset) with clear descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning, defaults, or constraints. According to the rubric, when schema coverage is high, a baseline of 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?

The description 'Get all inventory locations' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('all inventory locations'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'ebay_get_inventory_location' which retrieves a single location. The scope ('all') is explicit and aligns with the list-like behavior implied by the schema's limit/offset parameters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ebay_get_inventory_location (for a single location) or other location-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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