rr_execute_replenishment_action

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

Discloses idempotency via idempotency_key, rejection on stale expected_updated_at, and that it never auto-sends or commits stock. With no annotations, this covers essential behavioral traits comprehensively.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main action, then details. No waste, every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers behavior well but lacks description of return values (e.g., what the created draft orders look like). Given no output schema, some guidance on the response would improve completeness.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: explains why 'expected_updated_at' is needed (from prepare) and how idempotency_key ensures replay. Schema coverage is 100%, but description enriches understanding of causality and constraints.

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?

Description clearly states the tool executes a replenishment action to create draft purchase/transfer orders. The verb 'execute' and resource 'replenishment action' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like 'rr_prepare_replenishment_action' by focusing on execution in draft mode.

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?

Explicitly states 'Never auto-sends to suppliers and never commits stock', indicating this tool is for draft-only execution. It implies usage after 'rr_prepare_replenishment_action' via the 'expected_updated_at' parameter. Could be more explicit about when not to use (e.g., when final approval is needed).

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