get_listing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state what data is returned (price, seller KYA status, seller DID), which is helpful. However, it does not mention error behavior, authentication requirements, or whether the result is a full response structure; for a read operation this is acceptable but not thorough.

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, information-dense sentence without extraneous words. It front-loads the action ('Get full detail') and immediately lists the key fields, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the main return fields and clearly scopes the operation to a single listing. It does not specify the complete response structure or error handling, but for this level of complexity the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does not explicitly define listing_id, but the tool name 'get_listing' and the phrase 'for one listing' make the parameter's purpose inferable. However, the description adds no specific format or constraints beyond what the parameter name implies, so it is adequate but not enriched.

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 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource ('one listing') with a list of specific details (price, seller KYA status, seller DID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_listings, which presumably return multiple listings, by focusing on retrieving full details for a single listing.

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 phrase 'for one listing' clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving details of a specific listing, implied by passing a listing_id. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like search_listings for searching collections, but the contextual contrast with sibling names is sufficient. No exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions are given, so it's clear but not fully explicit.

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