get_inventory_risk_triage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool reads inventory risk and mentions output fields, but does not specify data freshness, permissions, or any side effects. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and scope, with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource.

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?

The description lists risk types and output fields, but lacks details on the structure of the response (e.g., array or single object) and how risk_level or coverage_state are formatted. Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves some ambiguity.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The baseline score of 4 applies as the schema covers everything.

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 it is a read operation for prioritized inventory risk, listing specific risk types and output fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like get_inventory_health or get_fba_inventory.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies a usage context but does not specify conditions or exclusions.

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