get_listing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that specifying a listing version returns only that version's details, and the Returns section details the response structure. It does not mention auth requirements or side effects, but the 'get' verb implies a safe read operation.

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 well-structured with purpose, behavior note, args, and returns sections. It is front-loaded but could be slightly more concise by avoiding the full schema repetition in Args; however, that repetition adds value given the 0% schema coverage.

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 tool's simplicity (get operation with 3 parameters, no output schema), the description is complete: it defines the resource, explains optional behavior, details all parameters, and describes the return structure including listing statuses and item details. No gaps are evident.

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 0%, but the description adds meaningful semantics for all three parameters: it provides patterns, length constraints, and explanatory text (e.g., 'The ID of the Amazon DataZone domain', 'The ID of the listing', 'The revision of the listing'). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool gets a listing, defined as a record of an asset at a given time in Amazon DataZone. It clearly identifies the verb and resource but does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_listings or other get_* tools.

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 implies usage when you have domain_identifier and identifier, and notes optional listing_revision behavior. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives such as search_listings.

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