search_stock_areas

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotations. It doesn't mention side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or return behavior, leaving the agent without insight into how the search behaves or what it returns.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is essentially a tautology of the tool name, making it minimally useful; it is short enough but lacks substance.

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 the tool has 4 parameters, a required body, no output schema, and nearby siblings (list_stock_areas, search_stock_locations), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what a search entails, what the body should contain, what results look like, or how it differs from listing stock areas.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific context; the schema's parameter descriptions are the only source of meaning, and the required 'body' parameter remains vaguely defined as 'as defined by the bexio API'.

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 'Search stock areas' is a direct restatement of the tool name, adding no new information. It fails to distinguish from siblings like list_stock_areas or search_stock_locations, as it doesn't clarify any specific filtering or matching semantics.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as list_stock_areas or search_stock_locations, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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