Create listing (draft)

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description correctly indicates that the tool creates a listing (write operation) in draft status, not yet visible. It does not discuss side effects beyond creation, but the draft status is disclosed. Given openWorldHint=true, additional context about potential side effects would be beneficial, but the description does not contradict 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 concise, consisting of three sentences that are front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value: creation in draft, required field, visibility after publish, and prerequisite resolution. No unnecessary words.

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?

Despite having 14 parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain the response format, error handling, or details for most parameters. It covers the essential flow but lacks completeness for a complex tool. The annotations include openWorldHint=true, which suggests additional side effects are possible but not elaborated.

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 has 14 parameters with only 21% described in the schema. The description adds minimal parameter semantics: it notes that only title is required and advises to resolve category_id and city_id from other tools. It does not explain other parameters like price, state, attributes, etc. With low schema coverage, the description should provide more guidance on parameter usage.

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 that the tool creates a new listing in DRAFT status, specifies the HTTP method (POST) and resource (/listings), and distinguishes it from publish_listing. It also notes the only required field (title), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains that only title is required and that the listing is not visible until published via publish_listing. It provides prerequisites: resolve category_id and city_id using category and location tools. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare to other siblings, it gives clear usage context.

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