check_inventoryCheck current price and in-stock status for a product and each of its variants/options. Pass a product slug or search keywords. Availability is as of the latest catalog sync.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product | Yes | Product slug, or keywords to find the product |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| live | Yes | ||
| products | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature. The description adds value beyond that by noting that availability is 'as of the latest catalog sync,' which communicates the freshness/staleness behavior of the data. No contradiction with annotations.
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. Purpose is front-loaded, then input guidance, then a relevant staleness caveat. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
Given a single parameter, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary invocation context. The only additional behavioral note worth making, the catalog sync freshness, is included.
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 100%, and the parameter description already states 'Product slug, or keywords to find the product.' The prose description repeats this exact guidance without adding additional semantic detail, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Check'), a concrete resource ('current price and in-stock status'), and the scope ('each of its variants/options'). It clearly differentiates itself from sibling tools like get_product or search_products by focusing on price/stock availability.
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 gives clear invocation guidance: pass a product slug or search keywords. It establishes the context for when the tool is appropriate (checking price and stock) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, 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.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are scoped to either products or articles, but there are overlapping pairs: check_inventory and get_product both return price and variant stock, and fetch and get_article both retrieve full-text content. search, search_products, and search_articles also share similar search intent, though their descriptions help clarify scope.
The set mixes verb+noun tools like list_products, get_article, and search_products with bare verbs like fetch and search, and noun-phrase tools like best_sellers, popular_content, related_products, and store_info. The naming is readable and partially patterned, but not consistently structured.
15 tools is at the upper end of the typical range, covering both a storefront and a publication plus sitewide search. The count is reasonable for the combined scope, though a few tools like check_inventory and get_product overlap enough that the set could be slightly tighter.
The gateway covers catalog browsing, product search, inventory, cart building, store policies, article search/retrieval, recent content, popular content, and general site search. Minor gaps include no paged listing of all articles beyond recent and no direct category-filtered product listing, but core workflows are well supported.