create_ai_recommendation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly communicates that this tool creates and persists a restocking alert, making the mutation obvious. However, it does not disclose side effects like duplicate alert handling, idempotency, or authorization requirements.

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 a single well-structured sentence that fronts the action, the object, and the trigger condition. There is no redundant or filler 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?

Given the low complexity (3 required flat parameters, no output schema), the description plus schema provides enough information to call the tool correctly. It also gives the business context for when the alert should be created. It could be slightly stronger with an explicit statement about what the tool returns or whether duplicates are prevented, but that is not essential for a basic create operation.

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 input schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the overall purpose, but it does not need to because the schema descriptions are sufficient.

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 states a specific verb ('Crea'), a concrete resource ('una alerta de reabastecimiento en la base de datos'), and the triggering condition for its use. It clearly distinguishes itself from the read-only sibling tools get_current_stock and get_sales_velocity.

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 gives an explicit when-to-use condition: when stock will run out before the supplier can deliver. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, though the sibling names make the contrast apparent.

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