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. 'Update' implies a mutation, but the description doesn't specify required permissions, whether changes are reversible, error handling, or response format. The example ('mark as shipped') hints at a common use case but lacks broader behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes a helpful example. There is no wasted verbiage, 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, this is a mutation tool with incomplete context. The description lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, error conditions) and doesn't explain return values, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an agent.

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 (shop_id, receipt_id, was_shipped, was_paid) with clear descriptions. The description adds minimal value by implying 'was_shipped' as an example but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what the schema states, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 ('update a receipt') and provides a specific example ('mark as shipped'), which gives concrete context. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'get_receipt' or 'get_shop_receipts', which are read operations, nor does it mention other possible updates beyond shipping status.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a receipt ID from 'get_receipt'), exclusions, or comparisons to other update tools like 'update_listing' or 'update_shop', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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