etsy_get_shop

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing about return shape, what happens with an unknown shop ID, or any API-key/auth constraint beyond the schema's required `api_key`, which keeps it at a minimum-viable level.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Brevity is good, but the same one sentence is doing too little work, so it sits below the top tier.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with strong annotations, the definition is adequate but leaves open what a "detail" response contains and how errors surface, and there is no output schema to compensate. It is callable but not fully informative.

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 only 50% (the `api_key` parameter is undocumented), so the description must carry some load. It clarifies that `shop_id` accepts an ID form, but its wording "shop ID or numeric ID" is vaguer than and slightly at odds with the schema's "Shop ID or shop name", leaving the accepted identifier forms ambiguous.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Get details for an Etsy shop") and identifies the lookup key, so an agent knows this is a single-shop lookup rather than a list. It does not name or distinguish itself from the nearby `etsy_search_shops` / `etsy_get_shop_listings` siblings, which costs it the top tier.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus `etsy_search_shops` (find a shop) or `etsy_get_shop_listings` (items within a shop). The agent must infer the single-record vs. search distinction from the name alone.

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