get_store_inventory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds value by specifying that the tool does not return exact quantities ('不返回未经门店确认的精确数量'), which is critical behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with purpose, concise, and contains no unnecessary words. Every part of the description 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?

With no output schema, the description explains the return value (statuses) and its limitation (no exact quantities). Parameters are simple and well-documented in schema. The tool definition is complete for its purpose.

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 has 100% coverage for parameters, each with a description. The description does not add parameter-level details but provides overall context about the response (statuses). This is acceptable but not exceptional; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb '查询门店库存状态' (query store inventory status) and lists specific statuses: 充足、少量、售罄、不供应或未知. It distinguishes from returning exact quantities, which differentiates it from potential sibling tools that provide numeric counts.

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?

Description implies usage for checking stock status but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling tools are listed but no differentiation is given, so usage context is only implicit.

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