keepa_sales_velocity

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose operational behavior. It fails to mention that the tool accepts multiple ASINs, supports pagination and filtering, or what the output looks like. The description is outcome-oriented but lacks the operational details an agent needs.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a helpful application phrase. No wasted words or redundant content.

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?

With 14 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description only provides a high-level purpose. An agent receives no guidance on what inputs to prioritize, what the result will look like, or how to interpret the output, making it incomplete for this complexity.

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 provides descriptions for all 14 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific verb ('Analyze') with a specific resource ('sales velocity and inventory turnover') and adds an application context ('find products that sell quickly and avoid slow movers'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like price history or product lookup.

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 a use case (analyze velocity/turnover to identify fast-selling products) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as product_finder or inventory_analysis, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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