get_supplier

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that the description adds nothing: it does not say what fields a 'dettaglio completo' includes, what happens when the id is unknown, or how the optional company scoping affects the result.

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?

It is a single short, front-loaded sentence with no waste, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision; the sentence carries almost no decision-relevant content.

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?

For a retrieval tool with no output schema, the description should indicate at least the shape of the returned supplier detail. With two parameters (one undocumented) and no return-value context, an agent cannot predict the response or handle not-found cases.

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 50%: company_id is documented in the schema (default FIC_COMPANY_ID or the token's single company), but id is entirely undocumented. The description does not compensate — it says nothing about the identifier format or the company-scoping behavior.

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 states a resource (fornitore) and a retrieval intent (dettaglio completo), so the agent can infer it returns a single supplier's full record. It does not differentiate from siblings like get_client, list_suppliers, or get_company_info, and the phrase is generic enough that 'detail' is undefined.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus list_suppliers (browse) or get_client (analogous entity type). The agent must infer that this is a single-record fetch by id, with no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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