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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly explains output shape (full directory, one row per supplier, sorted A-Z), format consumption (spreadsheet vs doc/wiki/README), and the Pro/free gating on Markdown. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but it covers the essential behavior of the export.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: scope and formats, consumer-friendly explanation, filtering guidance, and licensing condition. The core action is front-loaded with no redundant wording.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain what the caller gets back. It does: complete fields, row granularity, sort order, both formats, filtering behavior, and a licensing caveat. For a simple export tool this is complete enough to call correctly.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds modest context by mentioning filtering by category and free text, and by noting the CSV/Markdown output difference, but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Export'), a specific resource ('the supplier directory'), and the exact output forms ('CSV or a Markdown table'). It further characterizes scope ('every field, one row per supplier, A to Z by name'), which clearly distinguishes it from related tools like supplier_list or supplier_get.

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 gives clear usage context: filter by category and free text if you only want part of the directory, and notes that Markdown output requires Pro while CSV is free. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives to avoid, so it stops short of a full 5.

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