ebay_get_payment_policy

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe read operation, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose what the response contains, whether the ID must belong to the current seller, or any edge-case 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, efficient sentence with every word carrying meaning. The key scoping detail ('by ID') is front-loaded and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 simple single-parameter read operation with a fully documented schema and a readOnly annotation, the description is mostly complete. It does not explicitly cover return values or alternatives, but the low complexity reduces the need for those details.

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%; the parameter is already documented as 'The payment policy ID'. The description merely reinforces the 'by ID' semantics and adds no new information about format, constraints, or valid values.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('payment policy'), and a distinguishing retrieval method ('by ID'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like ebay_get_payment_policy_by_name and ebay_get_payment_policies.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies the tool should be used when a specific payment policy ID is known, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it. The agent must infer the distinction from sibling names rather than receiving direct guidance.

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