get_warehouses

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the edge case for accounts with no warehouses ('empty list or a clear API error') and implies a read-only listing via 'List', but says nothing about authentication/scope requirements or pagination. The hedge 'or a clear API error' is also imprecise about actual failure behavior.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each adds something (returned fields, use case, edge case). Mildly padded by the alternative-synonym parenthetical and the vague 'or a clear API error' clause.

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-parameter read-only listing with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned and the empty-state behavior. A brief note on auth scope or result ordering would close the remaining gap.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to describe; baseline is 4. The schema is empty and consistent with the description's claim that the tool takes no input.

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 ('seller's registered warehouses') and enumerates the returned fields (ids, descriptions, addresses). The parenthetical gloss 'multi-origin stock locations / depósitos' disambiguates a domain term, so no sibling (none of which handle warehouses) could be confused with it.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use context: accounts shipping from multiple addresses, and setting up per-origin shipping options. It offers no exclusions or named alternatives, but with no overlapping sibling tool there is little routing ambiguity to resolve.

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