Get a Market listing

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds two facts the annotations cannot carry: credentials (logins, passwords, cookies) are always stripped from the response, and seller/buyer-authored text is untrusted data rather than instructions. The prompt-injection warning is directly actionable for an agent consuming the output.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the return payload, followed by two short security-relevant statements. No filler, no restatement of the name or title, and each sentence carries distinct information.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the return contents, the sanitization guarantee, and the trust model for returned text. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and to handle the response safely; the only omission, not-found behavior, is a minor gap.

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%: item_id's format (the number in the listing URL) and description_length's default/range are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail about either parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns full details of one LZT Market listing') and enumerates the payload: price, seller, guarantee, description, category-specific attributes. The phrase 'one listing' plus the required item_id cleanly separates it from the sibling market_search, which returns sets.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should call this when it already has an item_id (typically from market_search) and wants the full record. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement, no mention of prerequisites, and no named alternative; the only explicit instruction concerns how to treat returned text, which is behavioral guidance rather than tool selection guidance.

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