list_inventory_tires

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully discloses pagination support, but fails to confirm read-only safety, rate limits, or what constitutes a tire object in the return data.

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 sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action (List tires) followed by behavioral feature (Supports pagination). Every word earns its place.

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?

Simple 3-parameter input with complete schema coverage handles the request side adequately. However, lacking an output schema, the description omits any characterization of the returned tire objects or error conditions, leaving operational gaps.

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 three parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, meeting the baseline expectation for high-coverage schemas.

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 uses specific verb 'List' and clear resource 'tires from Shopmonkey inventory'. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'list_inventory_parts' by specifying 'tires' as the resource, though it doesn't explicitly clarify the domain relationship between tires and parts.

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 siblings like 'list_inventory_parts' or 'search_parts'. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., whether locationId is required if env var unset) or exclusion criteria.

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