Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• list_storeA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It only mentions output fields, not side effects, auth needs, or limits. A score of 2 reflects minimal behavioral info.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It could add more context like sorting/filtering, but is efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description lists returned fields. The single optional parameter is clear. Sibling tools are distinct. Mostly complete for a basic list tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% and the reason parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter info, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool lists stores with specific fields (id, name, address, timezone). It distinguishes from sibling tools like raise_replenishment_order which are inventory-related.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies listing stores but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives, nor any 'when not to use' guidance.

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

• replenishment_order_statusA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get the current status' without clarifying read-only nature, possible status values, or side effects. The lack of such detail reduces transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no superfluous content.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read operation with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on the return format (what 'status' includes) and prerequisites (e.g., order must exist), which could be helpful for agent invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'current status of a previously raised replenishment order'. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like raise_replenishment_order (creates) and list_store (lists stores).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage after raising an order but does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context.

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

• raise_replenishment_orderA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Without annotations, the description correctly labels the tool as write action and warns about confirming quantity. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, or error conditions. It states return value partially (order_id, status) but no details on format. This is minimal transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Description is concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with the core action, and includes a necessary caution. Every sentence adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description identifies the action, return value, and caution. However, it does not mention preconditions like store or SKU existence, or what 'on behalf of Korral' means. Given 5 parameters and no output schema, more context about the order creation process would be helpful.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema already describes all 5 parameters with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating 'SKU' and 'store'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses specific verb 'Place' and resource 'replenishment order', and defines scope (SKU, store). It clearly differentiates from siblings which are read-only or status-checking tools.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage when needing to create an order, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or how it compares to siblings like replenishment_order_status or sku_report.

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

• sku_reportA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It indicates a read-only report (no modification implied). However, it lacks details on permissions, data freshness, or any edge cases. The description is honest but not comprehensive.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no redundant or vague wording. Every sentence adds value, making it highly efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the output schema exists (not shown but present), the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose and when to use it. It covers the report's contents and context without needing to detail return values, which is covered by output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with well-described parameters. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. According to the guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema fully covers parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it produces a consolidated reorder report combining SKU details, stock, demand, and lead time. It differentiates from siblings like list_store, raise_replenishment_order, and replenishment_order_status by focusing on a specific pre-order analysis.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly says 'Use this before raising a replenishment order,' providing a clear context for invocation. While it doesn't detail when not to use or list all alternatives, the sibling context implies its role, making the guidance adequate.

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