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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the exact fields returned (QtyOnHand, AllocatedQty, AvailableQty, OnPurchase, AvgCost) and the underlying GET /StockOnHand/{page} call. It omits auth/permission needs and rate-limit behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and returned fields, then appends the optional filters and the REST endpoint. It is dense but every clause carries information; the em-dash field list is slightly list-heavy but earns its place given no output schema.

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, enumerating the returned quantity fields is the right compensating detail, and the endpoint reference implies pagination. Nine params at 100% schema coverage means the description does not need to repeat them; what's missing is only guidance on result size or error behavior.

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% — all nine parameters are documented in the schema, including the asAtDate pattern and pageSize default. The description only restates the warehouse and as-at-date filters, adding no syntax or default detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb + resource ('List stock on hand per product') with an enumeration of the returned quantity fields, so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from the nearby siblings unleashed_get_product_stock or unleashed_list_stock_adjustments, so it stops short of 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?

'optionally for one warehouse or as at a past date' signals the two main filtering modes, which is useful implied guidance. However there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-a-sibling statement and no exclusions, so usage remains inferred rather than stated.

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