Etsy MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get all images' but does not clarify if this is a read-only operation, what the output format might be (e.g., URLs, metadata), or any limitations (e.g., pagination, rate limits). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to handle the tool effectively.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with the core action. It efficiently conveys the essential information without unnecessary elaboration, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that retrieves data. It does not explain what 'images' entails (e.g., file types, sizes) or the return structure, which is crucial for an agent to process results. The minimal information provided is insufficient for full contextual understanding.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'listing_id' documented as 'The listing ID'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not compensate but also does not detract.

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 'Get all images for a listing' clearly states the action (Get) and resource (images for a listing), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_listing' or 'upload_listing_image', which might also involve listing images, though the specificity of 'all images' helps somewhat.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_listing' (which might include images) or 'upload_listing_image'. It lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid listing ID) or exclusions, leaving usage unclear beyond the basic purpose.

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