diagnostics_inventory_salable_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Report', which weakly implies read-only, but fails to disclose whether the tool is destructive, requires authentication, or what side effects exist. No behavioral details are provided.

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 sentence, which is concise. However, it lacks necessary detail, so it is not optimally informative for its length.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide input format, output structure, and typical context. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with insufficient information to correctly invoke the 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?

The input schema has a single generic 'params' object with no specified properties. The description adds no information about expected keys (e.g., product ID, SKU, date range). While schema coverage is 100% in terms of properties, the tool description does not clarify how to construct 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 'Report on MSI salable quantity for a product' clearly states the action (report) and resource (MSI salable quantity per product). It distinguishes from sibling diagnostics tools like 'diagnostics_indexer_status_report' and 'diagnostics_product_display_check' by specifying a unique focus on salable inventory. However, it could be more explicit about what 'MSI' and 'salable quantity' mean.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other diagnostics or inventory reports. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases.

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