Prepare a Vinted listing

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

Beyond the annotations, it clearly discloses that nothing is sent to Vinted and nothing is published, that it creates a local draft, and that it performs searches/price estimation/category and brand lookup. This adds significant behavioral context not covered by readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with 'The main entry point' and ends with the actionable pipeline. It is dense but purposeful, with no filler. A slightly more structured format could improve readability, but it is concise enough.

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 21-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the overall workflow, safety guarantees, and next steps. It does not mention optional overrides like price/title/description or the research toggle, but those are already in the schema. Given the high complexity, this is reasonably complete.

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 90%, so the schema already documents nearly all parameters. The description only adds general context ('photo paths', 'facts you supplied') and mentions draft outputs, but does not need to elaborate further. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it is 'The main entry point' and 'creates a local draft' with specific actions: searches comparable listings, estimates a price, looks up category and brand, and writes title and description. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_listing_draft, validate_listing, and publish_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?

It provides explicit workflow guidance: 'Show the returned draft to the user, let them correct it with update_listing_draft, then validate_listing.' It also signals when to use it ('main entry point', 'give it what you can actually see in the photos plus the photo paths'). However, it does not explicitly list when-not-to-use scenarios, so it stops short of a 5.

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