Bulk get inventory by range

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation (get) but does not mention response format, pagination, inclusive/exclusive boundaries, required permissions, or any side effects, leaving the agent without critical behavioral context.

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 sentence that essentially restates the title in Japanese, adding minimal information. This is under-specification rather than effective conciseness; the sentence does not earn its place by providing new insights.

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?

Lacking annotations and an output schema, the description alone must fully inform the agent, but it only gives a vague purpose. It does not explain result contents, behavior when one parameter is omitted, or how this tool differs from the closely-related rms_bulk_get_inventory, making the description incomplete for safe invocation.

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 0% and the description does not address min_quantity or max_quantity at all. Although the parameter names are self-explanatory, the description fails to clarify how the range is applied (inclusive/exclusive), defaults when omitted, or validation, so no additional meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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 '在庫数範囲での一括取得' (bulk get by inventory quantity range) identifies a verb and resource with a range qualifier, distinguishing it from siblings like rms_bulk_get_inventory or rms_get_inventory. However, it closely paraphrases the title and lacks explicit detail about what is returned.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rms_bulk_get_inventory or rms_search_products. There are no mentions of typical use cases, filtering constraints beyond quantity, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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