list_stock_entries

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 explains that each batch has its own best-before date and location, and that the tool returns entry_id. While it implies read-only behavior through 'List', it does not explicitly state side effects or edge cases, but for a simple listing tool this is sufficient.

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 concise and well-structured: it leads with the core purpose, distinguishes from a sibling, gives two concrete use cases, and then documents the parameter. No filler or redundancy; every sentence contributes.

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 single parameter and lack of output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and usage. It implies the return includes entry_id, best-before date, and location, but does not explicitly state the full response format or potential error cases. Still, it is adequate for a simple listing tool.

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 has only one parameter 'product' with no description, but the description explicitly defines it as 'Product name, description fragment, or barcode.' This adds essential semantic meaning beyond the raw string type, fully compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 tool lists a product's individual stock entries per purchase batch, and immediately contrasts with list_stock which shows the total. It also mentions the purpose of retrieving entry_id for edit_stock_entry, making the resource and action unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly states when to call this tool: to get an entry_id before edit_stock_entry or to see which pack expires first. It also differentiates from list_stock by noting it shows the total versus the breakdown, giving clear guidance on when to use which.

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