ebay_issue_refund

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions required OAuth scope but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, reversibility, rate limits, or processing time. For a financial mutation, this is insufficient.

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?

Very concise: two sentences plus scope line. Front-loads purpose with no wasted words. Appropriate length for the tool.

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?

Despite 100% schema coverage, description does not explain the choice between refundItems and orderLevelRefundAmount, nor any return values. For a complex financial action, more context is needed.

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. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema; merely says 'specifying the refund amount and reason' without elaborating on structure or constraints.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Issue' and resource 'refund' for eBay orders, specifying full or partial refunds with amount and reason. Distinguishes from sibling tools that handle payment disputes or other refund-related actions.

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?

States 'Use this to refund buyers for orders' but does not provide guidance on when not to use or alternative tools. No explicit exclusions or context for choosing between refund types (line-item vs order-level), though schema covers that.

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