ebay_get_site_visibility_policies

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get', implying a read operation, but fails to mention authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, return format, or any side effects. A mutation tool would require explicit warning, but even for a read tool, more detail is needed.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is too concise and lacks substance. While brevity is good, it sacrifices valuable information that could aid the agent. It is not verbose but also not sufficiently informative.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns, what constitutes a 'site visibility policy', or how the filter parameter works. This lack of completeness forces the agent to infer or fail.

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%, with both parameters having descriptions. 'marketplaceId' is clear with its enum, and 'filter' is described as 'Filter criteria', though vague. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get site visibility policies for a marketplace' clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_listing_structure_policies' or 'get_item_condition_policies' through the specific 'visibility policies' resource, though it does not define what visibility policies are.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases. The large sibling list offers many similar policy retrieval tools, but the description provides no context for choosing this one.

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