check_stock_availability

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only check/calculation, but it does not state whether stock is reserved, whether there are side effects, what error behavior exists, or what the response contains. The behavioral contract is under-specified for a tool with no annotation support.

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, dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads 'batch check' and immediately states the secondary calculation, making efficient use of space.

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 is simple, with one well-documented parameter array, and the description captures its core purpose. However, there is no output schema and the description does not describe the return format, which leaves some ambiguity about how availability and the total are represented.

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 100%, and the description confirms the batch context and that the tool computes an order total. It does not add much detail beyond the schema's own descriptions for 'items', 'product_id', and 'quantity', but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameters.

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 names the resource clearly: batch checking stock availability and calculating the order total before checkout. It uses specific action-like nouns ('проверка', 'расчет') and is distinct from siblings like search_fireworks or create_order, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 phrase 'перед чекаутом' ('before checkout') gives clear contextual timing and implies this is a pre-order validation step. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the intended workflow is reasonably clear.

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