check_inventory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states a simple check but does not describe whether the operation is read-only, what response format to expect (though an output schema exists), how invalid material IDs are handled, or any authentication requirements. The description adds little beyond the tool name.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no redundant or irrelevant information. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools and provides no situational context, making it incomplete for an agent trying to select among similar inventory-related tools.

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?

The description mentions 'specific material ID' but provides no additional meaning about the parameter, such as format, source, or constraints. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description was expected to compensate, but it only restates the parameter name without clarifying its semantics.

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 the tool checks inventory level for a specific material ID, which is a specific verb+resource. It inherently differentiates from list-style siblings like get_low_stock_items and get_open_orders, but does not explicitly name alternatives or scope limitations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer its appropriate context from the name alone.

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