get_stock

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing safety and behavior. The verb 'Get' and the word 'current' clearly signal a read-only, real-time lookup with no destructive side effects. It does not conceal extra mutations or unexpected behavior.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and object, with no filler or redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple read operation with a rich output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned (stock level) and where (specific physical branch). It could mention a prerequisite like using list_stores to find store_id, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, but parameter names (retailer, store_id, product_id) are self-explanatory and retailer has an explicit enum. The description adds useful context by tying the tool to a 'specific physical store branch,' but it does not explain each parameter's format or relationship in detail.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('current product stock level'), and a precise scope ('at a specific physical store branch'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_product (product details) and compare_price (pricing comparisons).

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 phrase 'at a specific physical store branch' implies when this tool should be used and that it requires a store_id. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or says when not to use it, so an agent must infer the routing to sibling tools.

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