iqms_inventory_lot_trace

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it omits details about side effects (e.g., read-only nature), authorization requirements, behavior for nonexistent lots, or pagination/limits. Only the directional behavior is explained.

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 concise (two sentences), front-loads the core action ('Walk lot genealogy'), and efficiently explains both directional options without extraneous text.

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?

Despite the moderate complexity of lot tracing, the description does not explain the output format, return values, error conditions, or how results are structured. The absence of an output schema makes this information critical for an agent.

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 description adds value to the 'direction' parameter by explaining the meaning of each enum value, which supplements the schema's default value. However, the 'lot_number' parameter lacks any description in both schema and description, and schema coverage is only 50%.

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 as 'Walk lot genealogy' and explicitly defines the two directions ('from_components' and 'where_produced'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like iqms_inventory_onhand or iqms_boms_where_used.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as iqms_inventory_onhand or iqms_boms_explode. It does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where the tool is appropriate.

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