lpm_marketplace_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the data returned but does not state if auth is required, rate limits exist, or how errors (e.g., missing package) are handled. This lack of detail leaves the agent with incomplete safety information.

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 consists of two short, focused sentences: the first defines purpose, the second gives usage guidance. No words are wasted, and the most critical information is 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?

With no output schema or annotations, the description should cover output structure and error conditions. It lists the types of information returned but not their format or behavior on failure. This is adequate for a simple tool but leaves gaps.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameter with a clear description, making the tool's input self-documenting. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond restating the parameter format, but the schema alone is sufficient for correct usage.

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 tool retrieves marketplace information including pricing, licensing, seat management, and purchase status. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('marketplace information for an LPM package'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like lpm_package_info.

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 explicitly advises using this tool before recommending a paid package to check cost and access, providing clear context for when it is appropriate. While it doesn't enumerate exclusions or alternatives, the guidance is direct and actionable.

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