Delist one of your listings

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description correctly doesn't restate the mutation flag. It adds real value beyond the annotations: the concrete effect (buyers can no longer find or offer on it), the reversibility path, and the auth requirement (GLONGUS_API_KEY). It does not say what happens to existing offers or whether delisting is idempotent, which for a destructive tool is a remaining gap.

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?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the effect, then the reversal path, then the prerequisite. Every sentence carries information; nothing is restated from the tool name or annotations.

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 a one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the effect, the undo path, and auth. The missing piece is the side effect on any in-flight offers, which an agent would want to know before delisting; that keeps it from a 5.

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 100% for the single listing_id parameter, so the schema already documents the input. The description adds no syntax, format, or ownership-constraint detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('take one of your own active listings off the market') and immediately distinguishes it from the sibling relist_listing. An agent can tell exactly what this does versus get_listing, update_listing, or relist_listing without opening any schema.

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?

Makes the triggering condition clear (own, active listing) and names the inverse operation, relist_listing, as the undo path. It does not spell out when-not-to-use cases such as listings with pending offers, but the context is otherwise unambiguous.

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