Return the live restock index for a niche: which tracked items are restocking now, recently dropped, or low stock, across the indie shops we poll. Use to see real-time availability signals. niche must be one of: tcg, lego, funko, keebs, vinyl, aqua.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| niche | Yes | Niche key, e.g. 'tcg', 'lego', 'funko', 'keebs', 'vinyl', 'aqua'. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions 'live restock index' and 'real-time availability signals', implying a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive or discuss any rate limits or caching behavior. Adequate but not expansive.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence defines purpose and output, second adds usage guidance and constraints. Efficient and well-structured.
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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sufficient. It explains what the tool returns (restock index categories) and the required input with valid values. No 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 coverage is 100% (single parameter with description). The description restates the allowed values but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('live restock index'), and clearly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on real-time availability signals. The scope is well-defined: 'for a niche' with listed valid values.
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 states 'Use to see real-time availability signals' and lists required niche values. Although it does not explicitly contrast with siblings, the context is clear enough for the agent to decide when to invoke this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: fetching live restock signals, listing available niches, and predicting restock probability for specific items. No overlap or ambiguity.
Two tools use imperative verb_noun pattern (drop_index, list_niches), but will_it_restock uses a question form, breaking consistency. While still readable, the mix reduces predictability.
With only 3 tools, the set is small but well-scoped for the niche restock tracking domain. It covers the essential actions without being overly sparse.
The tools cover the main workflows: explore niches, get real-time restock signals, and predict restock for a specific item. Missing explicit historical data retrieval, but the core use case is fully supported.