ebay_suggest_budget

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not clarify whether this tool is read-only or has side effects, nor does it disclose what 'expected performance' means or how suggestions are generated. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more behavioral context but does not.

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, complete sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on the nature of the suggestions (e.g., format, metrics used) or any constraints. Given the complexity of eBay campaigns, more context would be helpful.

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 one parameter (campaignId) already described in the schema as 'Campaign ID to get budget suggestions for.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get budget suggestions for a campaign based on expected performance.' The verb 'get' and resource 'budget suggestions for a campaign' are specific, and the tool name aligns with its purpose. Among sibling tools like ebay_suggest_bids or ebay_suggest_max_cpc, this tool uniquely targets campaign budget, so differentiation is clear.

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 provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., ebay_suggest_bids for bid suggestions, ebay_update_campaign_budget to actually set a budget). There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an existing campaign or a specific campaign state.

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