expiring_soon

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the ordering ('worst first') and the default behavior for the 'days' parameter, but it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention pagination, result limits, or any other side effects. The 'List' verb implies a read, but it is not made explicit.

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, with the purpose front-loaded. The Args section is clean and provides exactly the needed parameter information with no waste. Every word earns its place.

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 simple list tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the filtering and ordering, and the parameter default. The only missing piece is an explicit statement of the return format or whether pagination is used, but that is a minor gap for a tool of this simplicity.

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 provides no descriptions (coverage 0%), so the description must fully explain the parameter. It clearly states what 'days' means ('Look-ahead window in days') and its default behavior ('Defaults to the configured window'), adding significant value beyond the schema definition.

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 states a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('items') and a precise condition ('already expired or due within N days'), plus ordering ('worst first'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_stock or below_min_stock without needing to open their schemas.

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 use case (checking items near expiry), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative tools. The purpose is obvious, but there is no direct guidance on tool selection.

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