Twelfth

Get supplier constraints

get_supplier_constraints

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a named supplier's lines in the open task (or every line) with the supply constraints and stock each carries: lead time, carton quantity, on order and stock on hand where the task holds them, plus cost and margin. A missing field means the task does not carry it, not that the supplier has none. Use it for lead-time, pack-size and inventory-capital questions about those lines. To resolve a supplier name use find_supplier; for changes in their offers use compare_supplier_offer_history.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`entity_name`	No	Entity name exactly as the user wrote it.
`supplier_name`	No	A supplier, matched as find_supplier matches one (exact, whole word or acronym), never as a fragment of product text. The result says how many lines the supplier has beyond the visible ones.
`include_stock_value`	No	Marks an inventory-capital question. The rows carry whatever stock measures the task holds either way.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rows`	Yes	One row per product line: sku, product, category, supplier, then the line's own measures.
`scope`	Yes	What population the rows were read from.
`truncated`	Yes	True when more rows matched than were returned.
`population`	No	Present on an unfiltered read: a reminder the rows are a slice, not the whole business.
`evidence_id`	Yes	Handle for these rows within this call's results. Not a citation.
`completeness`	No	Present when nothing matched: what the empty result does and does not mean.
`returned_rows`	Yes	Rows in this response.
`inputs_not_applied`	No	Inputs the snapshot could not apply.
`source_evidence_ids`	Yes	Workspace evidence IDs backing these rows. Empty when the source carries no evidence records.
`total_matching_rows`	Yes	Rows that matched before any limit.
`excluded_rows_without_metric`	No	Rows left out of a ranking because they carry no figure for the metric.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / include_stock_value / description

Previous value: -"Marks an inventory-capital question. The rows carry whatever stock measures the work unit holds either way."New value: +"Marks an inventory-capital question. The rows carry whatever stock measures the task holds either way."

addedInput schema / properties / supplier_name

Added value: +{
+  "description": "A supplier, matched as find_supplier matches one (exact, whole word or acronym), never as a fragment of product text. The result says how many lines the supplier has beyond the visible ones.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"Rows from the current work-unit snapshot."New value: +"Rows from the current task snapshot."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 4, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / include_stock_value / description

Previous value: -"True to include the stock value held per supplier, for inventory-capital questions."New value: +"Marks an inventory-capital question. The rows carry whatever stock measures the work unit holds either way."

First observedOct 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare safe read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, so the description need not repeat them. It adds a genuinely non-obvious semantic caveat: a missing field means the task does not carry the measure, not that the supplier has none. It doesn't discuss rate limits or truncation behavior beyond what the parameter schema already says.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what it returns, then the caveat, then the use-case and routing. Every clause carries information; nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose. Annotations cover the safety profile, all three parameters are documented at 100% coverage, and the description adds the one thing structured fields cannot: the missing-field interpretation and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is absent.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond it by tying include_stock_value to the 'inventory-capital question' framing and by clarifying that rows carry stock measures either way, which tells an agent the flag is semantic rather than purely functional.

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?

States a specific verb (read) and resource (a named supplier's lines in the open task, or every line), then enumerates exactly what each row carries: lead time, carton quantity, on order, stock on hand, cost and margin. This is concrete enough that an agent can distinguish it from every other get_* and find_* sibling without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names the questions it answers (lead-time, pack-size, inventory-capital) and explicitly routes to alternatives: find_supplier to resolve a name, compare_supplier_offer_history for changes in offers. Both the when-to-use and the when-to-use-something-else are stated.

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

All Twelfth tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.