Listing Bureau - Amazon Organic Ranking

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true; description adds valuable behavioral context about return payload (ASIN, keyword, active status, service volumes) since no output schema exists. Does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence establishes operation and filtering capability; second sentence discloses return fields. Perfectly sized 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?

For a 2-parameter read-only list tool without output schema, the description adequately compensates by listing return fields. With readOnly annotation covering safety profile and schema covering parameters, description provides sufficient contextual completeness.

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 has 100% description coverage ('Filter by Amazon region code', 'Filter by active status'). Description references 'optional filters' generally but does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what schema already provides. Baseline 3 appropriate given schema completeness.

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 uses specific verb 'List' with resource 'Listing Bureau Amazon projects' and clearly distinguishes from siblings like lb_projects_get (single retrieval), lb_projects_create, lb_projects_update, and lb_projects_archive through the plural 'projects' and list operation.

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?

Mentions 'optional filters' implying when to use (filtering needed), but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or direct references to sibling alternatives like lb_projects_get for single project retrieval vs this list operation.

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