get_stock_overview

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral constraints: unsupported parameters that raise errors and missing fields. It covers the key error conditions and limitations.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose and returned fields, the second lists important exclusions. No wasted words and front-loaded with the core action.

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 multiple parameters, the description is complete: it specifies what is returned and what is not. It lacks details on pagination or top parameter behavior, but that is minor.

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 schema already covers all parameters, but the description adds critical meaning: it clarifies that plant and storage_location are not supported and will raise errors, and it reinforces parameter mappings (MaterialId to Material GUID).

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 tool returns EWM stock overview records with specific fields (warehouse/storage type/bin/quantity/batch/owner). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_bin_utilization and get_storage_type_capacity, which have different purposes.

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 explicit guidance on what the tool does NOT support: filtering by plant or storage_location will cause errors, and no age/last-movement timestamps are returned. It lacks mention of alternatives but effectively advises when not to use this tool.

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