Seller update listing

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds useful behavioral detail: specs are re-validated, return_policy is re-validated against statutory floors, and buyer intents are re-validated at confirm time rather than blocking the update. This gives meaningful transparency without contradicting the supplied 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 three concise sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and ownership restriction, then adds the validation and deferred-intent behavior in a compact, structured way.

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?

The description gives enough context for the core operation and key validation behavior, and the schema covers parameter details and partial-update semantics. It does not describe response or error behavior, but there is no output schema, so that omission is acceptable.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds little new parameter-level meaning beyond restating that specs and return_policy are re-validated, which is already reflected in their 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 clearly states the tool patches an existing listing owned by the calling seller, giving a specific verb, resource, and ownership scope. It is readily distinguishable from sibling tools like seller_create_listing, seller_archive_listing, and seller_update_stock.

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 when to use the tool by saying 'Patch an existing listing the calling seller owns', but it does not explicitly compare against or exclude alternatives such as seller_update_stock or seller_create_listing. The deferred-revalidation note gives some context but not direct tool-selection guidance.

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