search_listings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It states the search action but does not disclose the return format (list vs count), pagination behavior, or any limitations. It also doesn't explicitly confirm this is a read-only operation beyond the verb 'Search'.

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 is a single, front-loaded sentence that is efficient and free of filler. Every word contributes to defining the tool's scope.

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?

Despite having 8 parameters and no output schema, the description provides only a high-level summary. It fails to explain what the response contains, how filters combine, or any search behavior details. A more complete description would mention result lists, defaults, or limitations.

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%, so all 8 parameters are already documented in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics; it merely summarizes a subset of the filters (keyword, brand, category, size, price range) and omits sort and limit.

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 the specific verb 'Search', identifies the resource as 'Poshmark fashion listings', and lists the filter dimensions (keyword, brand, category, size, price range). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like create_listing or get_offers.

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 makes clear it is for searching/finding listings, which implies use in discovery scenarios. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or reference alternatives, but the context is unambiguous given the sibling tool names.

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