inventory_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool runs a report (implying read-only) and explains filter behavior, but does not mention required permissions, rate limits, or return format. The lack of output schema further reduces transparency.

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-loaded with purpose and action, then details filter modes. No wasted words; efficiently conveys core usage patterns.

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 20 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers filter semantics well but omits result format, pagination, default values (partly in schema), and any behavioral constraints. It is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 only 15%, so the description compensates by grouping 15 parameters as 'friendly filter fields' and explaining their exact-match behavior. It also clarifies raw_overrides for advanced use. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type definitions, though individual parameter details are minimal.

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 the specific report being run ('Diaspark on-hand-by-style inventory report') and the resource is inventory data. The tool name 'inventory_search' aligns and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_customers' and 'sales_history_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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use friendly filter fields (exact match) versus raw_overrides for advanced filtering, and directs to external documentation for field mapping. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to siblings, but the domain differences are clear.

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