magaza__sema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description is consistent with a pure inspection tool. It adds the useful behavioral fact that the output is a body template to be applied to a later write, but says nothing about failure modes or what happens when 'operasyon' is unknown.

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 short sentences, the key purpose front-loaded and the usage rule immediately after. No filler, nothing redundant.

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 and 0% parameter coverage, the description should at least point at how to discover a valid operation name and what the returned shape looks like. It covers the core idea but leaves those gaps for a two-parameter 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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it never explains what 'operasyon' should contain or where to obtain a valid value (e.g. via magaza__endpoint_ara). Only the notion of 'magaza'/'operasyon' is loosely implied by the words in the sentence.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource: it returns the expected request body shape for a given store operation. The purpose is clear and distinguishes it from the execution sibling (magaza__cagir) by framing it as a pre-call schema lookup, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives explicit timing guidance: use it before POST/PATCH calls so the body is built correctly. It does not state exclusions (e.g. not needed for GET/DELETE) or name the companion tool that actually performs the call, so a small inference is left to the agent.

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