edit_listing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only repeats the tool's name and adds 'marketplace seller.' It does not mention side effects, required ownership/permissions, validation behavior, immutability of some fields, or what happens on success/failure.

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 text is short, but it is under-specified rather than concisely complete. A single generic sentence does not carry enough information for a 10-parameter mutation tool with no annotations or schema descriptions.

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 tool with 10 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far from complete. An agent cannot determine which fields are updatable, whether listingId is the only required key, or what the request/response behavior is.

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% across 10 parameters, and the description names none of them. It does not explain what price, status, weight, location, condition, or allowOffers mean or how they relate to an edit operation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Edit') and identifies a distinct resource ('marketplace seller listing'), which clearly sets it apart from sibling tools like edit_collection_instance or edit_order. It does not explicitly name alternatives, so it falls short of the top score.

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 gives no guidance about when to choose this tool over create_listing, delete_listing, or get_listing, and no prerequisites or context are provided. The need to edit an existing listing is only implied by the verb.

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