ordinals_get_listings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the return fields (price, seller, inscription details), that it is a read/browse operation with no wallet needed, and quantifies the rate limit (30 QPM shared unauthenticated) with the env var to lift it. Pagination semantics are only implied via parameters, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then return/behavior, then a clearly delineated rate-limit note and examples. Every section earns its place except the trailing 'call earning_opportunities' tip, which reads as cross-promotion rather than tool guidance.

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 read-only browse tool with no output schema, the description covers return fields, filters, auth requirements, and rate limits. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly; only explicit sibling disambiguation is missing.

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 limit, offset, sortBy, collection, and price bounds are all already documented. The description adds conceptual context ('filtering by collection symbol and price range') and worked examples, but nothing beyond the schema for sortBy/limit/offset. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Browse') and resource ('ordinals/inscriptions listed for sale on Magic Eden'), so the agent knows it's a marketplace listing feed rather than a P2P trade list. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from near-siblings like ordinals_p2p_list_trades or stacks_market_list, leaving some ambiguity for an agent scanning the tool list.

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?

Provides concrete examples for each filter mode (browse all, filter by collection, price range) plus a useful 'No wallet required' precondition. It never states when to prefer this over ordinals_p2p_list_trades or stacks_market_list, so exclusions are absent.

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