Seller update stock

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

Annotations carry no safety hints (all false), so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions the constraint 'Resulting stock must remain >= reserved' but does not explain error behavior on violation, atomicity, or permission requirements. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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?

Two concise sentences. The primary action is front-loaded, and parameter guidance follows immediately. No wasted words or redundant content.

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 three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the core usage and the key constraint. It does not discuss error handling or return values, but these are not essential given the schema and simplicity. Slightly incomplete but adequate.

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 parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the choice between stock and delta and reiterates the reserved constraint, but the schema already states these details. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Update a listing's stock count') and clarifies the two modes of operation. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling seller_update_listing, which might also modify stock among other fields. The focus on stock count distinguishes it reasonably.

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 choose this tool over alternatives like seller_update_listing or seller_create_listing. The description only explains parameter usage, not selection criteria or prerequisites. An agent must infer when stock-only updates are appropriate.

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