Fetch inventory summaries for up to 100 products in one call. Use it to assess stock levels across multiple items without querying each product separately.
Get inventory summaries for multiple products at once (max 100)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include | No | Related data to include | |
| productIds | Yes | Array of product IDs (max 100) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.0-alpha.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only the max-100 cap (already in the schema) and does not state whether this is a safe read, whether missing/invalid product IDs cause failures, auth requirements, or rate/partial-success behavior for a batch call.
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?
A single compact sentence with the batch scope front-loaded and no filler. Everything stated is relevant and appropriately sized for a two-parameter getter.
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 read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials are present, but the absence of annotations plus the lack of any behavioral detail (partial failure, permissions, what a 'summary' contains) leaves it only minimally complete.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both productIds and include. The description's only parameter note ('max 100') merely repeats the schema's maxItems and the productIds description, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (inventory summaries) and adds the batching scope ('multiple products at once, max 100'), which meaningfully distinguishes it from the sibling get_inventory_summary. However, it never names that singular sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is only implicit.
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 phrase 'for multiple products at once' implies when to prefer this over a single-product lookup, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no explicit reference to get_inventory_summary as the alternative. Usage is only inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.