wb_warehouse_remains

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add meaningful context by noting the operation is task-based and takes 10-60 seconds. However, it does not explain how the task result is obtained, whether polling is needed, or what the response contains, leaving 'task-based' as an incomplete hint rather than a full disclosure.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and then adds a valuable timing/behavioral note. The Russian parenthetical 'остатки по складам' is redundant with the English text but does not meaningfully harm conciseness.

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 task-based tool with no output schema and no annotations, the agent needs more detail about the result workflow. The description gives a duration but not what the tool returns, how the task is completed, or what subsequent steps are required, leaving a significant completeness gap.

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 the description has no parameter burden to carry. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description's 'split by WB warehouse' is about output orientation, not parameter meaning.

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 identifies the tool as a stock/remains report grouped by WB warehouse, giving a specific resource and output orientation. It does not explicitly differentiate it from stock-related siblings such as wb_analytics_stocks, wb_stats_stocks, or wb_stocks_get, which is why it falls short of a 5.

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 on when to use this tool versus the many stock, analytics, and warehouse siblings. The phrase 'Task-based, 10-60 s' hints at a particular usage context, but no alternatives, exclusions, or selection criteria are stated.

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