Listing Bureau - Amazon Organic Ranking

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

Adds crucial behavioral context beyond the idempotentHint annotation: explains the upsert-like reactivation logic, specific 201 return code for that case, and validation constraints (ASIN validity). Does not clarify behavior when project is already active or side effects like charging.

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?

Four sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with primary action, followed by critical reactivation behavior, then validation rules. Every sentence earns its place.

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 mutation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, description adequately covers the unique reactivation quirk and key validation rules. Missing explicit handling of active-project conflicts and return value structure, but sufficient for safe invocation given the schema.

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%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds 'ASIN must be a valid Amazon ASIN' (validation semantics) and reinforces keyword length constraints, but adds no context for 'region' or 'expected_retail_price' parameters.

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?

Specific verb ('Create') + resource ('Listing Bureau Amazon project') clearly stated. Distinguishes from sibling tools (archive/get/update/list) by defining the creation operation and unique reactivation behavior.

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?

Provides clear context for when reactivation occurs vs. new creation ('If a project with the same ASIN+keyword+region was previously archived...'). However, lacks explicit guidance on when NOT to use (e.g., active project conflicts) or explicit sibling alternatives.

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