list_sealed_inventory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions pagination and that the response includes quantities and prices, but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or has side effects. It also notes the authentication requirement, which is helpful.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: purpose, scope, alternatives, and authentication. No fluff.

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 list tool with pagination and no output schema, the description covers purpose, alternative, and auth. However, it lacks parameter specifics and does not fully clarify behavioral aspects like read-only nature. Completenss is adequate but not exceptional.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the description must compensate. However, it does not explain the 'page' or 'limit' parameters, only mentioning pagination generically. This leaves ambiguity about their meaning and usage.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), specifies the resource ('sealed-product inventory'), and narrows scope ('authenticated user's'). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'list_inventory' by noting the difference in product type (sealed vs loose cards).

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (for sealed products) and when to use an alternative ('For loose cards use list_inventory'). It also mentions pagination and authentication requirements, providing clear context.

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