Seller respond to review

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

Annotations indicate a non-readonly, non-idempotent operation. The description adds the crucial behavioral detail that subsequent attempts return 'already_responded', which is not covered by annotations. This clarifies the non-idempotent nature and provides a specific error condition, adding value beyond the structured fields.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and immediately states the key constraint. There is no redundant or filler content; every word contributes to understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

For a simple two-parameter operation with no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the action, the uniqueness constraint, and the error case. It does not mention prerequisites like authentication or permission requirements, but these are generally implied for seller tools and not essential for correct invocation.

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%, with both parameters (review_id and text) already documented. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Since the schema fully covers the parameters, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the specific action ('Post the seller's response to a review') with a clear verb and resource. It also adds the key constraint of one response per review, which differentiates it from sibling tools like seller_list_reviews. The purpose is unambiguous and distinct.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool (to respond to a review) and the constraint that only one response is allowed, signaling that the agent should check whether a response already exists. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the tool's name and sibling context make the usage clear without confusion.

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