marketplace_list_tariffs

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is established. The description adds only the implicit ownership scoping and says nothing about pagination, result size, or the tariff data returned, so it is minimally valuable beyond the annotations.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than optimized.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it never indicates what a tariff record contains or whether results are paged. Annotation coverage of the safety profile offsets some of this, but the description leaves the caller guessing about output shape.

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 50%: partner_id is documented as the developer account ID for ownership checks, but application_id has no description. The description's 'owned application' phrase only loosely gestures at application_id and adds no format or constraint detail beyond 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Marketplace billing tariffs and options) and scopes it to an owned application. It is distinguishable from sibling list tools by the 'billing tariffs' resource, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative named. The phrase 'for an owned application' hints at a precondition but never states the ownership requirement or what to call instead for unowned apps.

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