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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It does provide useful behavioral context: the tool is browser-based and performs a defined calculation. However, it doesn't disclose what the output looks like, whether data persists, or any limitations, so transparency is only partially addressed.

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 a single, compact sentence with a clear formula and a platform qualifier. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 0-parameter browser calculator with no output schema, this is minimally sufficient: it states the calculation logic and the core outputs. However, it leaves gaps around what the user actually receives (e.g., what 'optimal inventory' and 'order timing' mean numerically, or the interface format), so completeness is moderate.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to describe. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds the clarifying context that this is a browser-based tool rather than an argument-driven API.

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 clearly states the tool's function: calculate optimal inventory and ordering timing from purchase quantity and sales speed ('仕入れ数×販売速度→適正在庫・発注タイミングを計算'). It identifies the domain (Amazon inventory) and a specific calculation, but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling Amazon calculators like amazon-fba-calculator or amazon-sales-dashboard.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The formula implies it is for inventory planning, but there is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions. The only added context is 'Browser-based tool', which is more about invocation than usage guidance.

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