Get suggested maximum cost-per-click bids for eBay listings to set competitive ad campaign budgets and optimize marketing performance.
Suggest max cpc through the eBay Marketing API.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| request | Yes | Suggest max cpc request body |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.14.1Input schema / properties / requestAdded value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "description": "Suggest max cpc request body",
+ "properties": {
+ "listingIds": {
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "marketplaceId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / properties / suggestionRequestRemoved value: -{
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "description": "CPC suggestion request",
- "properties": {
- "listingIds": {
- "description": "Listing IDs to get suggestions for",
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
-}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "suggestionRequest"
-]New value: +[
+ "request"
+]v1.8.10Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the annotation readOnlyHint=false, the description adds no behavioral detail such as side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or response characteristics. It is not contradictory to the annotation, but it does not disclose what happens when the tool is invoked.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and API context. The phrase 'through the eBay Marketing API' is somewhat generic, but overall the description is not padded.
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 nested request parameter, no output schema, and the large pool of sibling suggestion tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the suggestion is based on, what the return value looks like, or what marketplace/listing constraints apply.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the request object and its nested properties are documented structurally. However, the description adds no semantic meaning to listingIds or marketplaceId, leaving the schema to carry the full explanatory burden.
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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Suggest max cpc' through the eBay Marketing API. It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from closely related siblings like ebay_suggest_bids or ebay_suggest_budget.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no explanation of which campaign or listing context applies. The phrase 'through the eBay Marketing API' only names the channel, not the usage scenario.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.