find_stock

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that unsupported chains return a clear error, and explains the optional filters. It does not cover rate limits or exact output structure, but the key behavioral traits are communicated.

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 three sentences, about 60 words, with the main purpose stated first. Every sentence adds value—examples and a limitation. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers purpose, optional filters, and a key limitation. However, it does not describe the output structure (e.g., what fields are returned per store). With no output schema, this gap reduces completeness for an agent that needs to interpret results.

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 already provides detailed descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds usage context and examples, but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

The description clearly states the tool checks which stores have a specific product in stock, with specific verb 'Check which stores' and resource 'stock'. It includes example queries that differentiate it from sibling tools like find_stores and get_product.

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 explicit usage examples and mentions that not all chains support per-store stock queries, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or point to alternatives. However, the guidance is clear enough for typical use cases.

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