get_ebay_category_aspects

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral load; 'List' correctly signals a read-only lookup and the examples clarify the payload shape. It does not disclose whether max_values caps values per aspect or overall, whether results are cached or rate-limited, or how large a category's aspect set can be.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and purpose stated first; the parenthetical examples are somewhat long but they meaningfully illustrate what an 'aspect' is, so they earn their place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the read-only nature is implied. However, with no annotations and zero schema coverage, the undocumented max_values parameter leaves a real gap an agent must guess at.

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 0% for two parameters, and the description compensates only partially: '(e.g. ... for a category)' implies category_id identifies the category, but max_values is never mentioned, leaving unclear whether it limits values per aspect or total values returned.

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: lists item-specific aspects and their common values for a category, with concrete examples (Size, Inseam, Voltage, Phase) and the downstream purpose ('for use in search aspects filters'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like suggest_ebay_categories, though it never names or contrasts with them explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'for use in search aspects filters' hints that this should be called before search_ebay to build aspect filters, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative for discovering categories versus aspects.

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