get_inventory_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses the data categories and optional filtering, but does not mention any potential caveats such as data freshness, pagination, or scope limitations. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 entire description is one clause-rich sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no redundant words.

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 the tool has an output schema and only one optional parameter, the description covers the core functionality. It doesn't address potential error scenarios or required permissions, but those are reasonably outside scope.

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 only lists 'sku' with no description, and the description adds meaning by explaining it as an optional filter to a single SKU. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though it could offer format or default behavior details.

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 identifies the resource 'current FBA inventory levels', listing the quantity types (fulfillable, inbound, reserved, unfulfillable). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on costs, orders, or profitability.

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 implies the tool is for inventory level queries, and mentions optional SKU filtering. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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