SupplyMaven API Pro

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: real-time monitoring, returns current price and 24-hour change, and tier limitations (free vs. paid). However, it lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, or data freshness, leaving gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose. However, the long list of commodities could be slightly condensed, and the sentence about free/paid tiers adds necessary context without being wasteful.

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 the tool's complexity (monitoring 31 commodities) and no annotations or output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose, scope, and output format but lacks details on error handling, data sources, or example outputs, which would enhance completeness for such a data-rich tool.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by explaining the scope (31 commodities) and tier differences, which compensates for the lack of parameters, earning a baseline 4 for zero parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('monitor', 'tracks') and resources (31 commodities across multiple categories), and it distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on commodity price monitoring rather than other supply chain signals like disruptions, congestion, or risk assessments.

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 clear context for usage ('supply chain cost management') and implies when to use it by specifying the commodities covered, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among the sibling tools, such as get_commodity_volatility_alerts.

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