Stock Overview Tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the return content (ID, name, amount) and the fact it lists current stock. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, though it is implied by 'see what is available'. It also lacks any mention of potential performance or ordering behavior, which is acceptable for a simple list tool.

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 ('List all products currently in stock with their quantities') followed by return details and usage. There is no fluff; every sentence earns its place.

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 there is an output schema, the return format is already specified. The description aligns with that (ID, name, amount) and adds the usage guidance. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The schema coverage is trivially 100%. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool, and the description does not need to add anything.

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 states a specific action ('List all products currently in stock') with a clear resource and scope ('all products', 'with their quantities'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing 'all' and the overview nature, which contrasts with tools like stock_search or stock_expiring.

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use this to see what is available before adding, consuming, or transferring stock.' This tells the agent when to invoke it (before mutations). It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough to differentiate from other stock tools.

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