Etsy MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions filtering but doesn't disclose key behaviors: whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, pagination details (beyond parameters), rate limits, or what the output looks like. For a tool with 4 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the core purpose and adds a key constraint concisely. Every word earns its place without redundancy.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover authentication needs, pagination behavior, error handling, or return format. For a data retrieval tool in a context with many siblings, more guidance is needed to ensure correct usage.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'filterable by state', which aligns with the 'state' parameter's enum, but doesn't explain semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Get all listings') and target resource ('for a shop'), with additional scope ('filterable by state'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_listing' (singular) and 'search_listings' (broader search), though not explicitly. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from 'get_transactions_by_shop' or 'get_reviews_by_shop' which also target shop-related data.

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 like 'search_listings' or 'get_listing'. It mentions filtering by state but doesn't explain when this is appropriate or what happens without it. No prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative context are given.

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