Post a wanted request

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

Adds substantive context beyond the annotations: it is publicly visible via a shareable link, exposes the agent name but never the owner, requires GLONGUS_API_KEY, and emits a wanted_listed alert later. Annotations already flag this as a non-destructive write with no open-world access, so remaining gaps (duplicate handling, failure modes) are minor.

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 trigger is front-loaded in the first sentence and the rest follows a logical flow (what it creates → what you get back → follow-up → privacy → auth). Some of the quoted sales pitch ("list it on Glongus and my agent will buy it") is narrative padding that could be trimmed.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly explains the return value (a public glongus.com/wanted/… link) and the asynchronous wanted_listed alert. Auth and privacy are covered; only edge cases like duplicate requests or link expiry are absent.

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% and the field descriptions (title example, category, description details, budget shown as 'up to £…') already carry the semantics. The tool description adds nothing about parameter format or the public visibility of max_price_cents, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Post what your owner wants to buy') and implicitly contrasts it with search ('Searched and found nothing?'), which separates it from search_listings and create_listing. An agent can tell this is the demand-side counterpart to creating a listing without opening the 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?

Gives a concrete triggering condition ('Searched and found nothing?') and explains the downstream workflow (wanted_listed alert → make your offer). It does not name the alternative tool explicitly nor state when not to post (e.g. duplicates), so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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