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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the endpoint path (confirming a GET), consistent with the annotations, but says nothing about result pagination or result size — a relevant behavioral trait given next_query.

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 short clauses, front-loaded with purpose. The trailing raw endpoint path is marginal filler for an agent but costs little.

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 simple read tool with full annotations and a fully documented parameter, most is covered. However, with no output schema, the description's return-value disclosure ("with their ids") is minimal and pagination behavior is left unstated.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage; the schema fully explains next_query's role and that other args are ignored on continuation. The description adds nothing beyond that, which is the baseline expectation.

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 (List) and resource (stock locations), and the parenthetical "(branches and warehouses)" clarifies scope in a way that separates it from the plain tillhub_list_branches sibling. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with that sibling, so not a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this versus tillhub_list_branches or tillhub_list_stock, and no mention of pagination workflow despite a next_query parameter existing. Usage is only weakly implied by the verb.

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