Stock Product Info Tool

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly frames the operation as read-only ('Returns') and lists what it returns: current amount, best-before date, and product metadata. It does not discuss errors or permissions, but for a straightforward lookup this is acceptable.

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 short sentences with no filler: the action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the return summary is in the second. 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?

For a single-parameter, read-only lookup tool with a full output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what input it takes, and what it returns. Nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, and the description adds essentially the same meaning as the schema's parameter description ('Product name or numeric product ID'). Since the schema already documents the parameter fully, the description provides no additional semantic value beyond the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed stock information for a single product'), making its scope immediately clear. The phrase 'single product' distinguishes it from broader stock tools like stock_overview_tool and stock_expiring_tool.

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 clearly communicates the intended context: use it when you need detailed information about one specific product. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the 'single product' scoping provides enough guidance for a simple lookup tool.

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