Simpler.Asia

stock_item_adjust

Move stock in or out by id or item name, in one atomic write with its movements-ledger row: stock-out clamps at zero (never negative) and applied_quantity reports what actually moved. An unmatched name CREATES the item at quantity 0 first so the delivery still lands as an audited ledger row; a name matching multiple active items refuses with the candidate ids. Concurrent adjusts on the same item retry instead of losing a write. NEXT: stock_item_list to see the item's updated balance in the full inventory.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "type": "<type>",
      "quantity": "<quantity>"
    },
    "name": "stock_item_adjust"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	The stock item id.
`name`	No	No id? Resolve-or-create by item name: a unique active match resolves; an unknown name CREATES the item at quantity 0 and the adjustment lands as its first ledger row.
`type`	Yes	"in" \| "out" — also accepts received/delivery/restock (→ in) and sold/used (→ out).
`unit`	No
`notes`	No	Free-form note recorded on the movements-ledger row.
`reason`	No	Why the stock moved — recorded on the movements-ledger row.
`category`	No
`quantity`	Yes	Whole units — count whole units: 24 bags → 24 (the digit string "24" also works).
`is_active`	No
`item_name`	No	Alias of name.
`expiry_date`	No
`occurred_at`	No	When the stock ACTUALLY moved (business time): "YYYY-MM-DD" or epoch milliseconds. Omitted = now. Backdated deliveries stay distinguishable from entry time.
`sell_price_cents`	No
`cost_per_unit_cents`	No
`low_stock_threshold`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses behavior far beyond the annotations: clamps stock-out at zero, reports applied_quantity for actual movement, creates a zero-quantity item on unmatched name, refuses on ambiguous multi-match with candidate ids, and retries on concurrency. The retry-on-conflict note is consistent with idempotentHint=false, and the item creation is consistent with destructiveHint=false.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Every sentence carries non-obvious behavior: clamping, resolve-or-create, ambiguity refusal, retry, and the next step. Purpose is front-loaded and no sentence is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 15-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description carries the important half: movement semantics, creation fallback, and even the applied_quantity return field. The gap is that the remaining item-attribute parameters' effect on auto-created items is unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 53%, and the description covers only the high-value parameters (id, name resolution, type, quantity semantics). The remaining 11 fields — unit, category, cost_per_unit_cents, sell_price_cents, expiry_date, low_stock_threshold, is_active — get no explanation in either place, particularly how they apply when the item is auto-created.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb+resource ("move stock in or out") plus the atomic ledger-row scope, with id-or-name addressing stated up front. An agent can distinguish this from stock_item_create/stock_item_update without opening any schema, since the write is framed as an audited movement rather than a record edit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear selector logic: id preferred, name as resolve-or-create fallback, and an explicit next step ("NEXT: stock_item_list"). It stops short of naming stock_item_update or stock_item_create as the alternative for non-movement edits, leaving that inference to the agent.

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

All Simpler.Asia tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?