CPA auction: my bids

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds context: it does not change spending, describes return fields (bid price, expiration, available prices), and mentions pagination behavior. No contradiction with 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: three sentences covering purpose, read-only nature, return fields, pagination, sibling reference, and rate limit. Front-loaded with purpose. No wasted 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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately describes return fields (bidPricePenny, expirationTime, availablePrices) and pagination. It covers read-only behavior, rate limit, and sibling reference. For its complexity, it is complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the fromItemID cursor default (0) and batchSize range (1-200, default 200), providing context beyond the schema descriptions.

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 reads active and available CPA auction bids for the user's listings, explicitly marking it as read-only. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'cpa_auction_save_item_bids' by stating that tool is for changing bids.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (read-only) and when not (to change bids, use the sibling tool). It also mentions pagination via cursor and a rate limit of 200 requests/min, guiding proper usage.

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