Retrieve all stock adjustment reasons from inFlow Inventory to review why stock quantities changed and support inventory audits.
List all stock adjustment reasons
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skip | No | ||
| sort | No | Property to sort by (e.g., name) | |
| count | No | ||
| sortDesc | No | Sort in descending order | |
| includeCount | No | Include total record count in response |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.0-alpha.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It merely says 'List all' and omits pagination behavior, read-only confirmation, authorization needs, and return shape, leaving significant gaps.
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 clear sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves gaps better addressed in the other dimensions.
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 five-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain pagination, sorting, or what 'all' means in a paginated 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?
Schema coverage is 60%, with descriptions for sort, sortDesc, and includeCount but not skip or count. The description adds no parameter meaning, so it fails to compensate for the uncovered parameters.
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 (List) and resource (stock adjustment reasons) with scope 'all'. It is distinguishable from list_stock_adjustments, which lists adjustments rather than reasons, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus list_stock_adjustments or get_stock_adjustment, nor any prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.