get_listing_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes outputs per marketplace and mentions that includeImages can return base64 images, but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, idempotent, or has no side effects. The focus is on return fields rather than behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication 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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose and then efficiently breaks down per-marketplace details. While it is somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value by specifying what each marketplace returns. It avoids unnecessary words and maintains clarity.

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 and no annotations, the description effectively covers the main purpose and per-marketplace output. It mentions that the ID comes from search results, which ties to sibling usage. However, it lacks details on error cases, prerequisites, or output structure beyond field lists.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the input schema already provides (listingId, marketplace, includeImages). The per-marketplace details are about output, not parameters, so no extra value for parameter semantics.

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 'Get full details for a specific listing using an ID from search results,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes between multiple marketplaces (Facebook, eBay, Depop, Poshmark) and their respective return fields, which differentiates it from siblings like search_marketplace.

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 implies the tool is used after search_marketplace by mentioning 'using an ID from search results,' and details what each marketplace returns, aiding selection. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives beyond the implied sequence.

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