list_low_stock_items

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses that untracked-stock items are excluded and that INVENTORY_R permission is required. This adds useful behavioral context without contradicting the annotations.

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 concise sentences deliver the core purpose, exclusion rule, and permission requirement without redundancy. The information is front-loaded and 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers scope, inclusion threshold, untracked-item exclusion, and required permission. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 schema has a single threshold parameter with zero description coverage, but the description defines its meaning: items whose stock is 'at or below threshold' are returned. This gives the agent sufficient understanding to set or omit the parameter.

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 clearly states the action: 'Return all items whose stock quantity is at or below threshold.' It also adds a scope qualifier ('Items with no stock tracking are excluded') that distinguishes it from general list_items or inventory tools.

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 intended use is implied by the low-stock semantics, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as inventory_reorder_suggestions. It does not explain when this tool should be preferred over other inventory-related siblings.

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