Repricing suggestion (advice only)

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

The readOnlyHint is reinforced with explicit wording that this is SUGGESTION ONLY and that the server never creates, edits, or deletes listings. It also discloses that cardmarket mode fetches live data using the caller's credentials, adding useful context beyond the annotations, though it does not describe rate limits or return behavior.

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 front-loaded with purpose and safety, then moves into input modes and strategy options. It is compact and largely waste-free, though the parenthetical credential note is slightly dense.

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 12-parameter tool with no output schema and low schema description coverage, the description should explain more about required reference fields for manual mode, the tcgplayer path, and the shape of the returned suggestion. It covers the central concept and safety behavior well but leaves meaningful gaps.

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 17%, and the description compensates for some key parameters: currentPrice, marketplace modes, idProduct, and the strategy enum including the competitive default. It omits important semantics for many other parameters, including tcgplayer mode, floorPrice, undercutPct, minCondition, foil, and competitorPrices, so coverage of the 12-parameter schema is only partial.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Suggests a new price for ONE of your listings.' It also immediately distinguishes this advice tool from mutation tools by saying the server never creates, edits, or deletes listings.

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 clearly explains the two input modes: Cardmarket with idProduct and credentials, or manual mode with your own reference numbers. However, it does not explicitly position the tool against sibling price-guide or seller-comparison tools, so the when-to-use guidance is strong but not fully comparative.

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