get_inventory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 50-id-per-call limit and the read nature via 'retrieve,' but it does not specify error handling, idempotency, or authorization requirements. The limit is helpful, but other behavioral aspects are unaddressed.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that combine the action and scope in the first and a clear usage condition in the second. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential input semantics, usage context, and a notable constraint (50 IDs). The output schema covers return values, so the absence of return details is acceptable. It is fairly complete for this simple case.

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 provides only a bare 'variant_ids' array with no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that the parameter accepts specific variant IDs and is capped at 50 per call, giving clear semantic meaning.

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 opens with 'Retrieve inventory for specific variants (up to 50 ids per call),' using a specific verb and resource while scoping to exact variants, making it distinct from the sibling list_inventory tool. It clearly states what the tool does without ambiguity.

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 phrase 'Use when you know exact variant ids and want their current stock' explicitly states the intended use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or recommend an alternative for bulk inventory queries, so it lacks full exclusion guidance.

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