ebay_get_email_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It fails to mention authentication requirements, pagination behavior (though hinted by schema), data scope, or any side effects. The tool's behavior is underspecified.

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 very short (one sentence) but lacks important details, making it under-specified. While concise, it sacrifices completeness, which is not ideal for a tool with pagination.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context. It doesn't explain the report's content, time period, metrics included, or how to interpret results. The user is left guessing what a 'performance report' entails.

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% (limit and offset described), so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to these parameters, such as what 'limit' applies to (number of reports?) or typical ranges.

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 it retrieves a performance report for email campaigns, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ebay_get_email_campaign (gets campaign details) and ebay_get_email_campaigns (lists campaigns). The verb 'Get' and resource 'performance report' are specific.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ebay_get_email_campaign or ebay_get_email_preview. No context about prerequisites or typical use cases is given.

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