run_ebay_seller

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a useful behavioral trait: a flat cost of 5 points per successful run (implying failed runs are not charged). However, it never states that this is a read-only operation, nor does it describe rate limits or how large the response is.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and ending with the cost note; no wasted phrasing. It is slightly terse on guidance, but nothing is filler.

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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (feedback, ratings, store details) and the cost, which is the key decision-relevant context. The main omission is the absent usage/alternative routing, which is scored separately.

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%, and the 'seller' param is documented with a concrete example ('cocosmartphones'), so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by username' adds only a slight nudge by clarifying the identifier is a username, but the schema already covers the store-URL alternative.

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+resource ('Get an eBay seller/store profile by username') and enumerates the returned payload (feedback, ratings, store details). It is clearly distinguishable from the many non-eBay siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the close sibling run_ebay_seller_feedback, whose scope overlaps with the 'feedback' it claims to return.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus run_ebay_seller_feedback or run_ebay_seller_items, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage 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.