get_stock_balance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'real-time' which hints at freshness, but doesn't cover permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'Bin' refers to operationally. This is inadequate for a tool with potential data sensitivity.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by parameter notes. The 'Args:' section is somewhat redundant with the schema but adds clarity. It could be more structured but avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given 2 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description is incomplete—it lacks details on parameter meanings and behavioral traits. However, the presence of an output schema mitigates some need to explain return values, keeping it from being severely inadequate.

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 must compensate but only partially does. It lists the two parameters as optional filters but doesn't explain what 'item_code' or 'warehouse' represent, their formats, or how filtering works. Since there are only 2 parameters, this is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'real-time stock balance from Bin', making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like get_item_price or get_stock_ledger by specifying it's about balance from Bin, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_stock_ledger or get_party_balance. The description only lists optional parameters without context about use cases or prerequisites.

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