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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful context: it returns JSON:API data, attributes, relationships, and pagination metadata, and identifies the underlying GET /api/suppliers endpoint. It does not cover pagination defaults or error behavior, but for a read-only list tool this is solid additional disclosure.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. 'Read-only' partially repeats the annotation and the endpoint line is somewhat redundant, but there is no filler and every sentence contributes to understanding.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately notes that the response includes JSON:API data, attributes, relationships, and pagination metadata. Combined with the complete input schema and read-only annotation, an agent has enough to call it correctly, though supplier-specific filter examples are absent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents page, filters, and page_size in detail. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what is in the schema, which is the baseline 3 when schema coverage is complete.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List the connected TOConline company's suppliers.' The plural 'List' and resource 'suppliers' clearly distinguish it from the sibling toconline_get_supplier, which retrieves a single supplier.

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 implies bulk retrieval of suppliers, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus toconline_get_supplier or when to apply filters. Usage is inferable from the name and resource but not spelled out.

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