get_stock_flow

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the tool retrieves history for a product over a time range. It does not disclose whether it's read-only, if it returns raw movements or summaries, or any pagination or filtering details. The brevity leaves significant uncertainty.

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 is not verbose. It front-loads the core purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured without adding length, e.g., clarifying the parameter roles.

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 is simple (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the basic purpose but lacks depth. An agent would need to rely heavily on the output schema to understand return values. Without annotations, more behavioral detail would improve completeness.

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 0%, so the description should add meaning to parameters. It implicitly references 'product' (mapped to product_id) and 'last N days' (mapped to days parameter with default 30). However, it does not explain that product_id is required or that days has a default, nor does it add any extra context like value constraints or format expectations.

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 returns 'stock-flow (movement) history for a product over the last N days', which is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'get_stock_levels_by_warehouse' that focus on levels, not movements. However, it could be more precise about what 'movement' entails.

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 guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_stock_levels_by_warehouse' or 'get_stock_levels_updated_since'. There is no context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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