wb_supply_create

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. It only states that a supply is created; it does not mention side effects, required prerequisites (e.g., an existing warehouse), what the response contains, or whether the operation is destructive or reversible.

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 one concise sentence and front-loads the core action and resource. The Russian translation adds minor redundancy but does not meaningfully detract from readability.

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?

Although the tool is simple with a single required parameter, the description omits key context: what 'name' means, what happens after creation, whether a supply ID is returned, and how it relates to sibling supply operations. This is insufficient for reliable autonomous invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain the 'name' parameter at all. An agent cannot determine whether 'name' is a supply label, a warehouse name, or some other identifier, making this a significant gap.

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 ('Create'), names the exact resource ('an FBS supply'), and states the purpose ('to ship assembled orders'). This clearly distinguishes the action from related supply tools like wb_supply_detail, wb_supply_delete, and wb_supplies_list.

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 phrase 'to ship assembled orders' implies the primary use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when this tool should be used versus alternatives such as wb_fbw_supplies or wb_supplies_reshipment. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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