store_inventories

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the return structure '{offers[], pagination}' and the effect of details:true. This goes beyond the annotation by explaining what the tool returns and a key behavioral nuance. No contradictions.

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 three short sentences: core purpose, a usage tip for details, and the return envelope. Every sentence is front-loaded and earns its place with zero fluff.

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 read-only list tool, the description sufficiently conveys the top-level return shape and a key parameter behavior. Since there is no output schema, the return format is minimally specified but adequate for the simple resource. It could benefit from more detail on the offers[] structure, but it is not necessary.

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 covers all 6 parameters with 100% description coverage. The description's mention of details:true is redundant with the schema description ('Include per-store breakdown (sets filter[details]=1)'). It adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Stock levels (and cost prices) per offer/warehouse.' This identifies the resource and data type, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_costs or list_stores by focusing on inventory levels.

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 usage guidance for a specific parameter ('Use details:true for the per-store breakdown') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_costs. It gives clear context for the details option but lacks exclusions or alternative references.

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