Check Mega MGC Coffee stock

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

The description discloses a behavioral aspect: without MGC_STOCK_API_URL, it returns public-site evidence with unknown stock status. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, but it does not cover other behaviors like rate limits or multiple store handling.

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 consists of two short sentences, front-loading the purpose and adding a key behavioral note. Every sentence is necessary and no words are wasted.

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 7 parameters (only 1 required) and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain how parameters interact (e.g., storeId vs sigungu), what the return value looks like, or error conditions.

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 input schema provides 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline.

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 'Check stock for a Mega MGC Coffee menu item', specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like check_mgc_stock_by_region or check_mgc_stock_nationwide.

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 implies when to use the tool (to check stock) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. The caveat about MGC_STOCK_API_URL is useful but not sufficient.

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