ozon_stock_on_warehouses

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says stock and turnover are returned. It does not mention pagination behavior, response format, warehouse scoping, authorization requirements, or data freshness.

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 compact, front-loaded sentence. It conveys the resource, endpoint, and a deprecation note without unnecessary fluff, making it easy to consume quickly.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not describe what the response contains, whether all warehouses are included, how the two pagination parameters interact, or how this tool differs from nearby stock and warehouse tools.

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%, and the description does not explain 'limit' or 'offset.' The parameter names suggest pagination, but the description adds no explicit meaning, leaving the agent to infer how paging works for this endpoint.

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 data returned: 'Stock and turnover at Ozon warehouses,' and connects it to the turnover/stocks endpoint. It is specific enough to identify the tool, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from similar stock-related siblings like ozon_analytics_stocks or ozon_product_stocks_by_warehouse.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The deprecation note ('the old endpoint was removed') provides historical context but does not explain when to select this tool over other stock-related tools.

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