QuailOS

create_inventory_product

Create a General Inventory product (optionally manufactured, with a BOM recipe). SKU must be unique in the farm. Supports confirm (false = dry-run preview) and idempotencyKey.

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": {
      "farmId": "<farmId>",
      "sku": "<sku>",
      "productName": "<productName>"
    },
    "name": "create_inventory_product"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sku`	Yes	Unique product SKU
`asin`	No	Amazon ASIN
`unit`	No	Unit of measure (e.g. each, pair, lb)
`farmId`	Yes	The unique farm ID
`hasBom`	No	True for manufactured items that have a BOM recipe
`status`	No	Product status (default active)
`barcode`	No	Barcode / UPC
`confirm`	No	Set to true to commit, false for dry-run preview
`category`	No	Inventory category
`costPerUnit`	No	Cost per unit
`productName`	Yes	Product name
`initialStock`	No	Optional initial stock (logged as "Initial stock setup" like the app)
`reorderPoint`	No	Reorder point
`sellingPrice`	No	Selling price
`bomComponents`	No	BOM lines (replaces the whole BOM when given). Components must already exist in this farm's inventory.
`idempotencyKey`	No	Unique request idempotency key
`shortDescription`	No	Short description

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the description's added value is the dry-run/confirm gating, the farm-wide SKU uniqueness constraint, and idempotencyKey support—all behavior an agent cannot get from annotations. It does not describe what the dry-run preview returns, which is the main residual gap.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences covering the core action, the hard constraint (SKU uniqueness), and the two behavioral switches. No filler and nothing buried.

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 17-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the highest-risk facts: uniqueness, dry-run safety, BOM handling. With 100% schema coverage and no output schema it doesn't need to enumerate optional fields, but it is silent on what the dry-run returns and on required permissions.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by stating SKU uniqueness semantics and the confirm dry-run interpretation, and by tying hasBom to BOM creation. It does not add anything about the many optional cost/stock fields, but those are already well documented.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (General Inventory product) and adds distinguishing scope: optionally manufactured with a BOM. It is clearly separable from create_production_order and update_inventory_product by the verb alone, though it never names those siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The confirm=false dry-run preview and 'SKU must be unique in the farm' give real usage context, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus update_inventory_product or how to correct an existing SKU clash. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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

All QuailOS 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?