ebay_suggest_bids

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states 'Get' which suggests a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, mention required permissions, or describe any constraints. This lack of detail is a significant gap.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the key purpose. However, it could include brief additional context about output or usage without losing efficiency.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the suggestions look like (e.g., recommended bid amounts, competitive insights) or how the agent should interpret the result, leaving significant gaps for a tool that returns data.

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 100%, providing basic definitions for campaignId and adGroupId. The description adds only minimal context ('for an ad group') beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without adding substantial meaning.

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 the action ('Get bid suggestions') and the target resource ('for an ad group'), with a helpful purpose ('Helps optimize bid amounts based on competition'). It differentiates from sibling tools like ebay_suggest_budget and ebay_suggest_keywords.

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 when to use the tool (for ad group bid optimization) but provides no explicit when-not-to-use conditions or alternative tools. There is no guidance on prerequisites or context where other tools like ebay_update_ad_bid might be more appropriate.

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