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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real value by disclosing the return envelope {page, totalsCount, isLastPage, entries[]} and the underlying endpoint, which lets the agent reason about pagination without an output 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?

One front-loaded sentence covering scope, optional filters, and return shape, plus a short endpoint tag. No filler or restatement of the name.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly supplies the response structure and pagination signal, and it marks all filters as optional. Gaps remain around sorting semantics and whether stock values are unit-qualified or per-warehouse aggregated.

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 57%, and the description only reinforces the variation and date filters already annotated in the schema. The sort_by/sort_order enums and paging defaults receive no added meaning in the description, so it is baseline-adequate rather than compensating.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('List physical stock per variation and warehouse') and enumerates the exact stock figures returned, so an agent can distinguish it from list_variations or list_warehouses without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly states the two narrowable modes — a single variation or a changed-since date — which tells the agent when the optional filters apply. It stops short of naming siblings to use instead for pure catalog data, so it is clear but not complete routing guidance.

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