get_days_of_cover

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

The description states it is a read operation and a stub locally, but no annotations exist. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, required permissions, or side effects. The read nature is implicit from the name.

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 sentences, front-loading the category and verb. It is concise with no wasted words, but the brevity sacrifices completeness.

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 complexity (7 optional parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'days of stock remaining' means or how to interpret results, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, achieving the baseline of 3.

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 identifies the tool as an inventory read for 'Days of stock remaining' and prefixes it with '[Inventory / read]', which specifies the category and verb. This distinguishes it from many sibling tools that deal with performance, orders, or campaigns.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_fba_inventory or get_inventory_health. It does mention 'Hosted endpoint only; this local stdio server is an introspection stub,' which warns about local functionality but does not help with tool selection.

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