M.Video stock update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies mutation (updating stock counts) and adds the dry-run guardrail, which discloses a safety mechanism. However, it does not state the finality of the operation, required permissions, or what happens after a confirm—key gaps for a mutating tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence adds a critical usage tip. No filler or redundant content.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but only covers the dry-run feature. It lacks information about required 'confirm' behavior (e.g., is a string needed?), response format, and other operational side effects, leaving an agent under-equipped to invoke the tool reliably.

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 0%, and the description only mentions dry_run. It does not explain the meaning or usage of 'items' or 'confirm', leaving users without guidance on how to structure the update payload or confirm execution—beyond what the raw schema field names imply.

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 action ('Update product stock counts') with a specific resource (product stock). This distinguishes it from sibling read tool mvideo_stock_info, which is for querying stock.

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 clear context that this tool updates stock and includes an actionable safety guideline: 'Use dry_run=true to inspect the request before sending.' It does not explicitly exclude cases or name alternative tools, but the dry-run instruction gives a strong usage hint for safe invocation.

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