find_negative_lot_location_balances

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only search but does not explain what 'derived' means, whether balances are computed on demand, how results are grouped, or any operational limitations.

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, tightly worded sentence with no filler. The main verb and resource are front-loaded, making it easy to scan and process.

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?

Although the output schema covers return shape and the parameter list is minimal, the lack of annotations and sparse description leave significant gaps: no usage context, no definition of 'derived', no differentiation from negative-stock report tools, and no operational guidance.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain product_ids semantics, why it is required, or how it filters the results. It mentions 'products' generically but adds no meaningful parameter-level guidance.

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 ('find') and names a concrete resource ('negative derived balances across products, lots and locations'). It clearly indicates a query operation, though 'derived' is somewhat vague and the tool is not explicitly differentiated from similar siblings like generate_product_negative_stock_report.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as generate_product_negative_stock_report, summarize_product_location_flows, or find_non_done_moves. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues beyond the name itself.

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