Hide a listing

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond these by explaining the action is reversible and does not delete the listing, which aligns with and expands on the annotations. No contradiction.

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 wastes no words. It conveys the action, scope, non-destructive nature, and reversibility in minimal space.

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 hide operation, the description covers the core behavior, reversibility, and ownership context. It does not detail return values or edge cases, but the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool make this acceptable.

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 description implies itemId refers to the user's listing to hide, adding meaning not in the schema. The country parameter is already described in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat it. With 50% schema coverage, the description partially compensates for the undocumented itemId.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Hides one of the user's listings from the catalogue.' It clearly states the action and distinguishes from deleting by noting 'without deleting it' and from reactivation via 'Reversible with reactivate_listing.'

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 provides clear context: it hides rather than deletes, and explicitly names reactivate_listing as the reversal alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., when permanent deletion is desired), so it falls short of full exclusion guidance.

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