ebay_get_offers_by_skus

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 transparently states that exact duplicates are queried once, at most 3 eBay requests run concurrently, and each SKU has its own success/failure result. This gives the agent important expectations about execution semantics and error handling, which is valuable beyond a generic 'get offers' statement.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the additional behavioral details (duplicates, concurrency, per-SKU results) are appended efficiently. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundancy with the schema.

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 tool has no output schema, the description could be expected to hint at the return format, but it does not. However, it does cover important execution semantics (deduplication, concurrency, per-SKU results) that an agent needs to call the tool correctly. The optional filter parameters are documented in the schema, so the description is largely complete for a read operation.

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 description coverage is 100% for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra value beyond the schema: it reiterates the 1-25 range and duplicate handling (already in the schema) and mentions concurrency, which is not parameter-specific. The description does not clarify the format or marketplaceId parameters further, but the schema already does.

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 verb 'Get offers' and the resource scope '1-25 SKUs'. It is specific about the input range and implies a batch operation, distinguishing it from singular 'ebay_get_offer'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'ebay_get_offers' (which might retrieve all offers), leaving a small ambiguity.

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 implies usage when you need offers for multiple SKUs and mentions deduplication and per-SKU results, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ebay_get_offers' or 'ebay_get_offer'. No exclusions or preferred scenarios are stated.

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