stockx_releases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the data source (StockX GraphQL API), that it is credential-free, the ordering (release date ascending), and the filtering ('on or after the given date'). It adds useful context about output contents, though it omits any caveats about empty results or rate limits.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every phrase adds value—details on ordering, product content, and data source are all relevant. No filler or repetition.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains return contents (product summaries, pricing, release dates) and ordering. It covers the core behavior well. Minor omissions like explicit pagination behavior or timezone notes are mostly covered by the schema, so the context is sufficiently complete for a moderate tool.

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 schema already documents all parameters with clear descriptions (from, page, limit), and the description does not add significant meaning beyond referencing 'the given date'. This is a baseline 3 because schema coverage is 100% and the description adds minimal extra semantic value.

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's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Get StockX upcoming release calendar.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like stockx_product and stockx_search by focusing specifically on releases and describing the output (date-ordered, new/restocked products, pricing).

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 makes the usage context clear: it retrieves upcoming release calendar data, implying use when release schedule info is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, though the name and context strongly suggest appropriate use cases.

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