get_item_visits

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the default date window (last 30 days), the 50-item cap, and the return shape (one entry per item id with total visits). It stops short of stating read-only safety or auth requirements, but fully covers the behavioral traits an agent needs.

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-loaded with the core action, then defaults, then the analytic use case. The 'powerful combo' sentence is longer than strictly necessary but earns its place by routing the agent to a real workflow.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining the return format (one entry per item id with total visits). For a read-only, 3-parameter tool with full schema coverage, nothing critical is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description restates the 30-day default and the 50-id limit, which the schema already documents, without adding format or edge-case semantics beyond that.

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 ('Get the number of page visits per listing') plus scope (date range). An agent can distinguish it cleanly from siblings like get_listing_prices or get_my_items 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?

Explicitly names the use case ('measure listing traffic') and a concrete combination workflow (get_my_items + get_item_visits to spot high-traffic, low-sales listings). This is direct when-to-use guidance, not inference.

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