Platforms get

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description's 'Fetch' wording aligns with that. It adds a useful behavioral detail by mentioning that decommissioned platforms include a banner and reason, which goes 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?

The description is compact and information-dense, with no filler. The first sentence states the primary purpose and returned fields, while the second handles the decommissioned-platform case, both earning their place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by enumerating the main response components: KYC status, rolling-window metrics, on-time-ship rate, dispute resolution percentiles, anomaly-pause count, and decommissioned banner/reason. This gives the agent a solid picture of what to expect with minimal ambiguity.

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 schema fully describes the slug parameter, and the tool description reinforces that it is a URL slug and explicitly clarifies it is not a UUID. This gives the agent clear guidance on what value to supply.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource: a platform's public reputation profile by slug. It also lists the key data points returned, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools like sellers_get or catalog_get_product.

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 a consumer needs a platform's public reputation data, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The context is inferable from the wording, but not directly stated.

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