luceed_skladisni_dokumenti

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state whether the call is read-only, what the actions return, whether a UID/barcode must exist, or any permissions/rate limits. 'Actions:' hints at endpoint dispatch but discloses nothing beyond that.

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 single line is front-loaded with the resource and free of filler. It is lean rather than padded, though the extreme brevity means it is arguably under-specified rather than truly concise.

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 output schema, no annotations, and two opaque action endpoints, the description omits what a caller needs to know: what each action retrieves, what the payload looks like, and how the action/parameter pairing works. It is far from sufficient for an action-dispatch tool.

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 every parameter (uid, barcode, action enum) is documented in the schema itself. The description only repeats the two action names already in the enum, adding no format or semantic detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

It names the resource (warehouse documents / Skladišni dokumenti) and its two actions, so an agent can tell it deals with warehouse documents. But it supplies no verb (retrieve/list/fetch) and gives no basis for distinguishing it from the sibling luceed_skladista (warehouses) or luceed_stanje_zalihe, leaving the exact purpose 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?

The description enumerates the two actions ('uid', 'barcode') but never says when to use one versus the other, nor when this tool should be chosen over the many related warehouse/stock siblings. Usage has to be inferred entirely.

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