list_suppliers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List' which implies a read operation, but it does not confirm read-only behavior, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. The lack of transparency is significant for a list operation that likely returns multiple records.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. For a tool with no parameters and a straightforward purpose, conciseness is appropriate. However, it could benefit from additional context without being overly long.

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 that the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of default behavior (e.g., all suppliers, pagination, ordering). For a list operation, agents might need to know if results are limited or sortable. The output schema may cover return fields, but context on scope is missing.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds the essential meaning that the tool lists 'product suppliers,' which clarifies the purpose beyond the empty schema. With no parameters, the description must convey what the tool retrieves, which it does, albeit minimally.

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 'List product suppliers.' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (suppliers). It distinguishes from other list tools by specifying 'product suppliers,' which is a unique entity among sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list operations like 'list_products' or 'list_warehouses,' but the resource is unique.

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. There are no context signals, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned. Users and AI agents are given no information about scenarios where this tool is appropriate or not.

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