ebay_update_return_policy

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It only says 'Update an existing return policy', indicating mutation, but lacks details on permissions, side effects, error handling, or whether the update is partial or full replacement.

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?

Description is very short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, earning a middle score.

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, no annotations, and the description does not explain return values, error conditions, or the effect of the update. A more complete description would mention that the update is a full replacement of the policy, or what is returned upon success.

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 parameter descriptions are present (e.g., 'The return policy ID'). However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema. The nested 'policy' object's fields are not elaborated, leaving the agent to infer from the schema.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'return policy', making purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like ebay_update_fulfillment_policy or ebay_update_payment_policy, but the tool name already provides differentiation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ebay_create_return_policy or ebay_delete_return_policy. The description does not mention prerequisites, common scenarios, or exclusions.

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