Set inventory levels

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive/read-write; the description adds concrete consequence semantics with 'sending 5 leaves 5 in stock regardless of what was there before.' It stops short of mentioning permissions or rollback, but the core overwrite behavior is clearly disclosed.

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 sentences with no filler; the absolute-value semantics are stated first, then the cross-reference to the read tool. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple one-top-level-parameter write with no output schema, the description covers action, scope, parameter semantics, and the safe workflow for delta adjustments. Multi-variant behavior is implied but not explicitly atomic; that is a minor 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the crucial stock_after parameter as an absolute target rather than a delta, and clarifies the payload can cover one or more variants/stores. variant_id and store_id are left to their self-explanatory names, but the main semantic trap is resolved.

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 the action precisely: 'Set stock to an absolute figure for one or more variants at a store.' The 'not a delta' clarification makes it easy to distinguish from any inventory-adjustment or read tool.

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 explicit direction to call loyverse_get_inventory first when the intent is to add or remove a quantity, which is a clear when-to-use rule versus the sibling read tool.

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