rr_get_inventory_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to state that the operation is read-only, whether it requires specific permissions, or what the response structure looks like. The bare description offers no behavioral context beyond the name.

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 a single concise sentence, which is efficient but very minimal. It could be structured better with more detail without adding much length. The conciseness is adequate but not exceptional.

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?

The tool has no output schema and the description does not mention what the response contains (e.g., an array of location-stock pairs). Given that the tool likely returns a list, the description is incomplete. Sibling tools like rr_get_inventory_value have more context.

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%, but the description adds no clarification about the two parameters (item_id, sku). It does not explain whether they are alternative identifiers or both required, nor their format or constraints. The schema names are self-explanatory but not expanded upon.

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 'Get stock-by-location for an item' clearly states a verb (Get), resource (stock-by-location), and object (item). It distinguishes from siblings like rr_get_inventory_value which is a different metric. However, it could be more explicit about being for a single item, but overall clear.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives like rr_get_inventory_value or rr_get_sales_history. The description does not provide any context about typical use cases or when not to use it.

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