Bella

Inventory Alerts

inventory_alerts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify products at or below their reorder level, most urgent first, and return stock, 90-day sales pace, days of cover, and a suggested reorder quantity.

Instructions

Products at or below their reorder level, most urgent first.

For each: stock, reorder level, units sold in the last 90 days, days of cover left at that pace, and a suggested reorder quantity (enough for ~45 days, at least 2x the reorder level).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "inventory_alerts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`category`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: urgency ordering, the fields returned per product, days-of-cover logic, and the suggested reorder-quantity formula.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is short and front-loaded: the core alert condition and ordering come first, followed by a compact list of returned fields. Every sentence carries useful information with no visible padding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only alert tool with an output schema, this is largely complete: it explains ordering and the key computed return fields. The main gap is that it omits any mention of the optional category parameter, so the definition does not fully cover the input surface.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has zero description coverage and the description never mentions the optional category filter. Although the schema exposes the category enum values, the description adds no meaning about how category scoping works or what the null default implies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description precisely states the resource and condition: products at or below their reorder level, returned most urgent first. That is specific enough to distinguish this inventory-alert tool from sales_summary, top_customers, customer_profile, and ask_bella.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the reorder-level alert scope, but the description never explicitly says when to use this tool versus other inventory or sales tools. It also gives no exclusions or alternative-tool routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server