out_of_stock

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies the exact edge-case definition of 'out of stock' and notes that no minimum stock levels are needed. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, though it does not detail output format or ordering; still, this is strong for a zero-parameter read tool.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence gives the core purpose, and the second clarifies the boundary against below_min_stock without any filler or redundancy.

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, zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, this description is fully sufficient. It explains what is returned, the precise condition, and where to go for the adjacent case, so an agent can invoke it correctly without further context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially covered. The description adds conceptual meaning by explaining that the absence of parameters is intentional: no minimum stock thresholds are required to use this tool.

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 and resource: 'List products with zero stock.' It also clearly scopes the meaning ('there is none left at all') and distinguishes it from below_min_stock, making the purpose 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 use this tool: for products with zero stock, with no minimum stock configuration required. It also names the alternative below_min_stock for products that still have stock but are under a configured minimum, giving clear routing guidance.

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