update_product_stock

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

The description only says 'update stock quantity' without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether units can be positive/negative (add/subtract), what happens to negative stock, or if warehouse is optional. No annotations compensate, so the agent must infer behavior from the schema.

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, front-loaded with the core action, no extraneous text. Efficient and to the point.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain return values, success/failure indicators, or prerequisites (e.g., product existence, permissions). It is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 100%, and parameter descriptions are already clear ('Product ID', 'Warehouse ID (optional)', 'Number of units to add or subtract'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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 it updates stock quantity for a product. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'update_product' which may update other fields. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from potential alternative stock adjustment tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., shipping tools or other stock updates). No exclusions or prerequisites provided, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate context.

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