Raise a replenishment order

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

Annotations offer only high-level hints (readOnly=false, idempotent=false). The description adds substantial behavioral detail: dry-run default with preview contents, confirm gating execution, ALLOW_WRITES requirement, and the critical caveat that confirm=true reflects agent judgment not human approval. No contradiction.

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 the core action, then tightly packed with essential workflow and safety information. Every clause earns its place; no repetition or fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the return value preview elements (order, on-hand, sales velocity, stockout projection, warnings, sanity check), execution prerequisites, and a safety caveat. For a tool with this complexity, the description is fully self-sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description enriches parameter understanding by explaining confirm's dual dry-run/execute behavior, store_id optionality based on authorization, and idempotency_key's purpose—none of which are in the schema descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Raise a replenishment order for a SKU at a store.' It clearly distinguishes this write tool from sibling read-only tools like list_authorized_stores and check_stock_risk.

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?

Provides clear context: dry run by default for human approval, confirm=true to execute, and ALLOW_WRITES requirement. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the write vs read contrast is implicit and the workflow is well described.

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