commerce_supplier_evaluation

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

The annotations indicate destructive and non-idempotent behavior, but the description does not disclose any concrete side effects (e.g., what data is created, updated, or deleted). It only mentions routing, adding little beyond the annotations.

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 concise and has a clear Args section. It avoids unnecessary fluff and is appropriately sized for a generic wrapper, though the generic nature limits its usefulness.

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?

While the output schema exists (per context), the description gives no information about expected outputs, possible results, or the domain semantics of supplier evaluation. An agent would be uncertain about what to pass in or what to expect back.

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 parameters 'message' and 'inputs' are described at a very generic level ('Free-text objective', 'Optional JSON string of structured inputs') that would apply to any domain-agent action. No detail is given about what the objective or structured inputs should contain for supplier evaluation specifically.

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 only restates the tool name ('Run the commerce domain agent action supplier_evaluation') without explaining what supplier evaluation actually does. It provides no domain-specific behavior that distinguishes it from numerous other commerce or domain-agent tools in the sibling list.

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 use this tool instead of alternatives. The only additional sentence describes the routing mechanism ('Routes through the platform's domain-agent dispatcher') which does not help an agent decide between this and other similar actions.

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