Extract Amazon product media

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

Annotations declare openWorldHint and non-idempotent, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: 1 credit charged on success including cache hits, free polling, replay behavior, and an untrusted-data/warning-preservation instruction. It stops short of saying how to retrieve the async job's result or how long results are cached.

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?

Front-loads the resource extraction sentence, then layers in async behavior, cost, and the untrusted-data warning with no filler. Some sentences are telegraphic ("Polling is free.") but each conveys a distinct operational fact.

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 an async-capable, credit-metered tool with no output schema and 5 parameters, the description should at minimum name the polling/result sibling needed to obtain the job output. It also omits the include/renderMode semantics, so key calling decisions remain undocumented.

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 60%, and the description only references the idempotency key, which the schema already documents in detail. The include object (five booleans) and renderMode enum are never explained in the description, leaving the nested object and render mode semantics to the schema alone.

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?

States a specific verb and resource set ("Extract product images, variant images, and videos") which clearly identifies the extraction operation. It does not name the sibling it differs from (amz_get_scrape, amz_get_product_media), so the boundary with those tools is left implicit.

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?

Implies usage via "Returns a cached result or an asynchronous job" and "Use an idempotency key for retries," but never states when to choose this over amz_get_scrape, amz_get_scrape_result, or amz_get_product_media. The agent must infer the create-then-poll workflow from sibling names alone.

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