wb_supply_trbx_stickers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it only names output formats. It does not state whether the tool generates/downloads stickers, whether it is read-only, what the response contains, or what supply context is required.

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 short and front-loaded with formats, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It does not earn its brevity because several essential pieces of guidance are absent.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is not complete enough to invoke the tool correctly. It omits return behavior, the meaning of required identifiers, and selection guidance, leaving the agent to guess from names.

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 needed to compensate. It adds the 'box' context that helps interpret trbx_ids, but it does not explain supply_id, the relationship between the parameters, or add anything beyond the enum values already in the schema for sticker_type.

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 identifies the resource (box QR stickers) and the supported output formats (svg|zplv|zplh|png), so an agent can infer this tool is about obtaining box stickers. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'generate', 'get') and does not distinguish it from sibling sticker/barcode tools such as wb_orders_stickers or wb_supply_barcode.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool over alternatives or what conditions select it. The sibling list contains related tools like wb_supply_trbx_list and wb_orders_stickers, but the description offers no scenario, prerequisite, or exclusion to help an agent choose.

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