⚠️ Остатки: изменить

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description includes a warning emoji. However, the description does not disclose additional behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as whether the update is additive or replaces all stock, or any side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise, consisting of a single sentence with a warning emoji. It is front-loaded with the critical warning about modification. However, it could be slightly more structured to include usage notes without adding length.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (updating stock for up to 200 items) and the absence of an output schema, the description lacks information about expected return values, success indicators, or error handling. It is not fully complete for an agent to understand the full context of invoking this tool.

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 100%, so the schema already describes parameters in detail. The description adds minimal extra value by summarizing the structure, but it essentially repeats what is in the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states that the tool modifies stock quantities in ads (verb 'изменяет' + resource 'остатки в объявлениях'), and distinguishes it from the read-only sibling stock_get_stocks_info. It also specifies the required and optional fields, 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?

The description lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of scenarios where this tool is appropriate or not, nor any reference to other stock-related tools like stock_get_stocks_info.

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