listings_update

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions field lengths and video format but does not clarify behavior on omitted fields (e.g., whether they are cleared) or side effects like requiring a valid edit context.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second lists field constraints. No fluff; front-loaded with key information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should cover usage context and side effects. It explains field constraints but omits how full replacement behaves (e.g., missing fields reset to empty) and prerequisites like active edit.

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 43%. The description adds max lengths for title, shortDescription, fullDescription, and video format hint, helping usage for those 4 parameters. Required fields (packageName, editId, language) lack additional context, but schema already covers them.

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 it performs a 'Full replacement update of a locale listing', specifying the resource and update type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like listings_patch (partial update) and listings_get/listings_list (read operations).

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 phrase 'Full replacement update' implicitly indicates this tool is for replacing all fields, contrasting with a patch. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and alternatives are not named.

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