ebay_get_vero_reason_code

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly identifies the operation as a read ('get'), which implies no destructive side effects. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. For a simple read operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 no waste. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides context on what reason codes are. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The tool has low complexity (one input parameter, no output schema, no annotations). The description is adequate for a simple read operation, but it could mention that the return value is a reason code object with details such as name, description, etc. Given the lack of output schema, the description should ideally hint at what is returned.

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 'veroReasonCodeId' is described as 'The unique identifier'). The description adds no new semantic details beyond echoing 'by ID'. Since the schema already defines the parameter fully, the description provides no additional value for parameter semantics.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'Get a specific VERO reason code by ID' and defines what reason codes are. It contrasts with the sibling tool 'ebay_get_vero_reason_codes' (plural) which likely retrieves all codes, making the purpose distinct.

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 a specific ID is known, but does not explicitly contrast with the list version or provide when-not-to-use advice. Given the sibling tool 'ebay_get_vero_reason_codes', it would benefit from stating 'Use this instead of ebay_get_vero_reason_codes when you have a single ID.'

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