ms_get_stock

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) indicate safe read-only behavior. The description adds value by explaining the fast-report nature, default stock_type behavior, include_zero effect, and return format (JSON with data array). It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral context beyond the metadata.

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 extremely concise: 5 lines covering purpose, parameters, and return format. No redundant words; every sentence earns its place. Front-loaded with key action and resource.

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 an output schema exists, the description adequately explains the return structure ('Returns JSON: {"ok": true, "data": [ {assortmentId, <stock_type>}, ... ]}'). Both parameters are documented, and edge cases (include_zero, no money) are addressed. No gaps remain for a simple stock snapshot 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 0%, but the description explains both parameters: stock_type (lists possible values: quantity, freeStock, reserve, inTransit, stock, with default) and include_zero (boolean effect). This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only has types and defaults.

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 'Current stock snapshot, grouped by product' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ms_get_products (product catalog) and ms_get_money (financial reports) by focusing on stock levels and noting 'No money in this report.' The path and grouping add specificity.

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 implies use for stock snapshots but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like ms_get_products or ms_get_stores. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided, leaving the agent to infer from the resource name.

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