ebay_get_tracking

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the tool gets tracking information, but fails to mention aspects like read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 concise at one sentence, with no wasted words. It could include more useful information without being verbose, but it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 an output schema, the description should explain what information is returned. It does not, leaving the agent to guess the response format. Additionally, it does not differentiate from similar tools like ebay_get_package, making the tool incomplete in context.

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?

The input schema description for the 'params' parameter already clarifies that 'tracking_number' is required, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description itself adds no further parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get tracking information for packages' uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (tracking information for packages), making the tool's purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like ebay_get_package, which could be confused for a similar function.

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, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where it should be avoided. This lack of direction leaves the agent without sufficient context for correct selection.

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