Generate listing description

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing output structure, a hard 160-character constraint on the opening, and a conditional rule (digital-download disclosure only 'when digital') — genuine behavioral content not in the annotations.

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 ending in a colon-list; dense but every clause names a real output section, and the 'when digital' qualifier is placed at the point of relevance. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 13 parameters, low schema coverage, no output schema, and nested objects, the description is only partially complete: it sketches the returned artifact's sections but not its length limits (e.g. Etsy's 1400-char body cap), and it leaves the more than half of undocumented inputs unexplained. Adequate to call the tool, insufficient to call it well.

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 only 38% across 13 parameters, including a nested attributes object, so the description must compensate — and it does so only partially. It implicitly maps to keywords, highlights, whats_included, how_to_use, shipping_or_delivery, and digital, but says nothing about modifiers, attributes, dimensions, care_or_requirements, call_to_action, name, or product_type.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Write a structured, scannable Etsy description') and enumerates the exact sections produced, so the agent knows precisely what artifact comes out. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like generate_titles or generate_tags, relying on the reader to infer the division of labor.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance at all. An agent selecting among generate_titles, generate_tags, generate_description, and suggest_long_tail gets no routing signal from this text beyond the word 'description'.

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