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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying API route (GET /stock_available/warehouse_id/{warehouse_id}), but says nothing about pagination, server-side truncation of large replies, or result shape — all of which live only in the schema.

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 compact clauses, scope front-loaded, zero filler. The API route is the only mildly redundant element but it is short and aids traceability.

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 nine-parameter filtered read with no output schema, the description plus the fully-documented schema covers what an agent needs to call it correctly, and 'per product and variant' signals the result granularity. Missing is any note that large responses are truncated and paginated via next_offset, which matters at limit up to 250.

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%, so every one of the nine parameters (limit, offset, warehouse_id, brand/category/supplier filters, archived flag, references) is already documented with cross-references to the list_* tools. The description adds only 'optionally filtered', which does not extend meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Available stock per product and variant') plus a hard scope ('in one warehouse'), which is enough to separate it from hiboutik_stock_all_warehouses and hiboutik_stock_by_product without opening either schema. The endpoint line reinforces that this is a single-warehouse read.

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?

'Optionally filtered' implies you call it when you want a scoped stock listing, but the description never names the alternatives (stock_all_warehouses, stock_by_product) or states the condition that selects one over another. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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