ebay_get_store_task

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

Goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing the auth requirement (active eBay Store subscription, sell.stores scope) and the shape of the response (task id, type, status, message). It does not cover polling cadence or task expiry, which would be useful for an async status-check tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core action front-loaded, followed by return values and the auth prerequisite. No filler or restated name/title padding.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description enumerates the returned fields, and it covers the parameter origin and the subscription prerequisite — enough for an agent to invoke correctly. Missing only async-specific behavior such as polling expectations or eventual-consistency timing.

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% and the single taskId parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the same point (taskId originates from the add/rename/move/delete tools), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get the status'), a specific resource ('one asynchronous eBay Store category task'), and even names the underlying API operation (Stores API getStoreTask). An agent can distinguish it from ebay_get_store_tasks (plural) and the mutation siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it by naming the four producer tools (ebay_add/rename/move/delete_store_category) whose returned taskId feeds this call. It does not name a competing tool as an exclusion, but the context is clear enough that an agent knows exactly when to reach for it.

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