ebay_get_opted_in_programs

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is safe and non-mutating, and the description 'Get seller programs' is consistent with that. The description adds the scope ('seller programs the account is opted into') but no additional behavioral context such as return shape or authentication implications. With the annotation carrying the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the action ('Get') and the resource. Every word earns its place; there is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary context.

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 zero-parameter, read-only retrieval tool, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns conceptually (seller programs the account is opted into). A small gap is the lack of any indication of the response format, but this is minor for such a simple 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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially complete and there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 for parameterless tools applies, and the description appropriately references the resource being retrieved.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('seller programs the account is opted into'). It clearly reads as the retrieval counterpart to sibling tools ebay_opt_in_to_program and ebay_opt_out_of_program, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from other getter tools like ebay_get_privileges or ebay_get_advertising_eligibility.

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 usage context is implied rather than stated: it is a read-only lookup for opted-in programs, and the sibling naming pattern indicates it is not the tool for changing opt-in status. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over related getters, but for a zero-parameter getter the absence is not critical.

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