run_inventory_sweep

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses a cost ('Consumes 1 Auto-Credit') and implies mutation via 'restocks' and 'optimizes', but says nothing about permissions required, reversibility, rate limits, or what happens to items it fails to restock.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its sub-tasks, followed by the credit cost. No filler, though the parenthetical list is dense and could be slightly tighter.

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 no-annotation mutation tool with no output schema, the description omits critical context: what the sweep returns, what gets modified, failure handling, and the prerequisite of sufficient Auto-Credits. It covers the 'what' but leaves the agent guessing about outcomes.

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 store_id, items_to_scout and min_inventory_target are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or interplay detail (e.g. how min_inventory_target drives restocking) beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Perform an automated inventory maintenance sweep') and enumerates the three sub-operations (audits dead supplier links, restocks scouted finds, optimizes stale pricing). This distinguishes it from the narrower siblings run_pricing_audit and audit_source_urls, though it never explicitly says it is the composite of those.

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 when-to-use guidance and no exclusions. Siblings run_pricing_audit, audit_source_urls and scout_store_items overlap with the sub-tasks this sweep performs, yet the description never says when to prefer the sweep over those focused tools or how often to run it.

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