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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds genuine domain context beyond that: AWD snapshots do not expose FNSKU, and it is rolled into get_days_of_cover. It doesn't detail pagination or freshness behaviour, but the schema/annotations cover the rest.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and exclusion criteria, with no redundant wording. Every sentence contributes either scope, a limitation, or routing to the correct sibling.

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 read-only snapshot tool with full schema coverage, complete annotations, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, exclusions, alternatives, and a key data limitation. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents all 8 parameters including defaults, ranges, and pagination guidance. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The first sentence gives a specific verb, resource, and scope: raw AWD inventory snapshot with on-hand and inbound quantities per SKU. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming get_fba_inventory and get_listing_registry with view='listings'.

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?

It states when to use it (raw AWD snapshot), when not to (FBA fulfillable stock or ASIN-level identity), and points to the exact alternatives to use instead. It also notes inclusion in get_days_of_cover, which further clarifies routing.

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