get_b2b_wholesaleB2B pricing tiers for restaurants, bars, hotels, and events (per-can INR by monthly volume), keg/draft options, and how to book a tasting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It details what information is retrieved (pricing tiers, keg/draft options, tasting booking) and assumes no side effects. This is adequate for a read-only tool, though it does not mention auth requirements or response format.
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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, target audience, and contents. No filler words; every component serves a purpose. Front-loaded with the core offering.
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?
Given no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's returned information. It lists key content areas (pricing, keg options, tasting booking). Slightly lacking in specifying output format, but acceptable for a simple retrieval tool.
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?
Input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none to document.
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 provides B2B pricing tiers, keg/draft options, and how to book a tasting for restaurants, bars, hotels, and events. It uses specific verb 'get' and resource 'wholesale info', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_pricing_and_delivery which likely covers general pricing.
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?
The description implies usage for business customers needing wholesale pricing or keg options. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the target audience and purpose are well-defined, guiding appropriate invocation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose covering different aspects: beers, brand, process, pricing, nutrition, recipes, subscriptions, wallet, wholesale, buy link, and waitlist. No two tools overlap significantly.
Most tools use the 'get_' prefix for information retrieval, with 'list_beers' and 'join_waitlist' as slight deviations. However, the pattern is consistent (verb_noun with underscores) and clear.
13 tools is well-scoped for a brewery server, covering all essential aspects without being overwhelming. Each tool serves a specific need, and none feel superfluous.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle: brand info, product details, pricing, ordering, subscriptions, waitlist, wallet, and even recipes and nutrition. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.