ebay_get_inventory_task

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only; the description goes beyond them by stating the required OAuth scope ('Requires sell.inventory') and enumerating the fields returned. That auth/scope disclosure is genuinely useful context an agent cannot get from the schema. It stops short of describing pagination or failure behavior, so it isn't a 5.

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?

One compact sentence front-loads the resource and key, then appends the return contents and scope requirement with no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description usefully summarizes the returned fields and the required scope, which is enough for an agent to call and interpret it. It lacks any note on error cases or what an inactive/complete task returns, a minor gap.

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 single taskId parameter is already documented in the schema, including its origin (Location header of a create call or a task list). The description adds nothing beyond repeating 'by taskId', so the 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?

Names a specific verb and resource: fetches a single Feed API active inventory report task by taskId, and lists what the response carries (status, filter criteria, timestamps). The word 'one' implicitly distinguishes it from the plural ebay_get_inventory_tasks, but the description never names that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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 'by taskId' phrasing implies this is a lookup after a task exists, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus ebay_get_inventory_tasks or ebay_get_feed_task. No exclusions or alternative routing are stated.

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