get_cross_marketplace_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It implies a read operation ('ver precio') but does not explicitly state idempotency, rate limits, authentication needs, or return format. Minimal disclosure beyond implied behavior.

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 sentence, which is efficient but lacks structure. It does not front-load critical details or organize information for quick parsing. Acceptable but not exemplary.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it is incomplete: it misses parameter explanation, usage context, and behavioral traits. The tool is simple, but the description fails to cover essential information.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'SKU' and 'EU marketplaces' but does not explain the 'marketplaces' parameter format or behavior (e.g., default behavior when empty). The description adds little meaning beyond the schema's raw parameter names.

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's purpose: viewing the price of a SKU in all EU marketplaces. The verb 'ver' (see) and resource 'SKU' are specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'sync_marketplace_prices' or 'get_competitive_pricing', so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for appropriate usage.

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