ebay_get_negotiated_price_policies

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it could be slightly expanded to include critical usage context without losing 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 output schema and annotations, the description should compensate by explaining what the tool returns and any constraints. It does not describe the return format, typical use cases, or the meaning of 'negotiated price policies'. For a simple tool with two parameters, this is incomplete.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('Marketplace ID' and 'Filter criteria'), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining the format of the filter or the effect of different marketplace IDs.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('negotiated price policies') and specifies the scope ('for a marketplace'). It distinguishes from sibling tools, as no other tool explicitly targets negotiated price policies. However, it lacks additional context like what a negotiated price policy is.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it fits into the broader workflow. Sibling tools include many 'get' operations, but no differentiation is offered.

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