get_low_stock

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' clearly indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation, and the filter condition adds specific context about what items are returned. It doesn't cover edge cases (e.g., items with no threshold), but for a simple listing tool this is adequate.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no wasted words. It is concise and directly conveys the tool's function.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects), the description fully covers its purpose and behavior. An output schema exists, so the return format is handled elsewhere; no additional context is necessary.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Per the baseline for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics.

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 a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource 'consumable inventory items' with a precise filter condition ('at or below their low stock threshold'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_materials or search_inventory, which serve broader or different purposes.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool—for querying consumable inventory items with low stock—but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. Since the sibling list includes other inventory tools, the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool over list_materials or search_inventory without additional guidance.

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