get_forecast

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

No annotations are provided. The description discloses the demo mode behavior (synthetic data), but does not mention if the tool is read-only, idempotent, or has side effects. The presence of a client_request_id parameter suggests idempotency, but this is not explained.

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 with two sentences, no redundant information, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks explanation of return values (format of Low/Mid/High), meaning of demo mode in practice, and how to use the idempotency key. Important context is missing.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning 'product family' and 'period', aligning with family_id and period parameters. However, it does not add meaning beyond the schema for token, buyer_id, or client_request_id.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'availability forecast' with specific granularity 'coarse (Low/Mid/High)', and the scope 'for a product family and period'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (well_known_capabilities, discover_products) by specifying the unique output and context.

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 mentions 'Demo mode: synthetic data only', implying it is intended for testing, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No comparison to sibling tools or prerequisites are given.

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