Get EIA Oil Inventories

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds context beyond annotations by mentioning the premium tier requirement and the available return views ('latest weekly figures; optionally a summary view or a breakdown by petroleum product'). No contradictions with annotations.

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 core purpose. The second sentence efficiently adds usage scenarios and access requirements. No wasteful words.

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 the simple one-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool returns, when to use it, and access requirements. It could provide more detail about the exact structure of returned data, but the parameter descriptions already explain view-specific outputs, making it reasonably complete.

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?

There is one parameter (view) with 100% schema description coverage; the schema already explains each enum option. The description merely restates the view options without adding extra meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Get the latest EIA weekly petroleum inventory (stocks) data.' It uses a specific verb and resource and lists trigger phrases like 'oil inventories, crude stocks, weekly EIA stocks, inventory builds/draws.' While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like opa_get_storage, the purpose is unambiguous and sufficiently differentiated.

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 explicitly says 'Use when the user asks about oil inventories, crude stocks, weekly EIA stocks, inventory builds/draws, or product-level inventory levels,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also discloses the prerequisite 'Requires the Reservoir Mastery premium tier,' which is valuable context for the agent.

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