getMyAds

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Get' is consistent, so there is no contradiction. The description adds the useful scoping fact that results are limited to the caller's own P2P advertisements, but it does not disclose pagination behavior or whether the optional filters combine.

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 clear sentence with no filler. The action and resource are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 tool with seven optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain what side or status values mean, how pagination works, or what an ad item includes, though the read-only annotations and optional parameters make a basic no-argument call straightforward.

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?

All seven parameters are strings with no descriptions in the schema, and the description provides no parameter-level guidance. Parameter names like page, size, side, status, tokenId, and currencyId give some hints, but allowed values and exact meanings are left entirely to inference.

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 names the exact action ('Get the list') and resource ('my P2P advertisements'). The word 'my' distinguishes it from siblings like getAds, and 'list' contrasts with getMyAdDetails, postAd, updateAd, and removeAd.

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 possessive 'my' implies this is for retrieving the caller's own P2P ads, and the list framing implies use for collection-level queries rather than single-ad operations. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when to prefer getMyAds over getAds or getMyAdDetails.

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