toast_get_stock_item

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 only states that the tool retrieves stock information; it does not disclose response behavior, defaults beyond what the schema hints at, error cases, data freshness, or any access considerations.

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, concise sentence with no filler or repetition. However, its brevity contributes to the lack of behavioral and parameter clarity, so it is efficient in structure but not fully informative.

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?

Given three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin to fully guide an agent. It does not explain what inventory data is returned, how location selection works, or why restaurantGuid exists. An agent would likely need to infer too much before calling the tool safely.

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 only 33%, and the description does little to compensate. It references 'a location' but does not explain the relationship between locationGuid and restaurantGuid, nor does it clarify that itemGuid is the required identifier. The parameter meaning is mostly left to the schema, which is under-described.

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 a get operation on inventory/stock data, scoped to a specific item and location. It is distinguishable from list-style siblings such as toast_list_low_stock_items, though the exact meaning of 'stock/inventory information' is left vague.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no mention of prerequisites such as having a valid itemGuid. The description implies use cases but never explains when this is the right choice over related tools like toast_get_menu_item or toast_list_low_stock_items.

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