bokio_list_suppliers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description adds only that results are paged and accept a raw query filter, which is already visible in the schema; it says nothing about sort order, empty-result behavior, or the companyId default beyond the 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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the sibling routing hint. The parenthetical Swedish term earns its place by aiding query matching.

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 annotations, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the definition covers what an agent needs to select and call the tool. Minor room remains: nothing about default company scoping behavior or typical result volume, though the schema covers the former.

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 every parameter including the '&&' query syntax and companyId default is already documented. The description merely names paging and the query filter without adding format or interaction detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 suppliers') and adds the Swedish term 'leverantörer' so it matches localized user queries. It also routes the adjacent resource away ('Their invoices are listed by bokio_list_supplier_invoices'), making it distinguishable from the supplier-invoice siblings.

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?

Gives clear usage context by pointing invoices to bokio_list_supplier_invoices, which implies this tool is the supplier-enumeration entry point. It stops short of explicit exclusions such as when to prefer bokio_get_supplier for a single supplier or when to avoid the raw query filter.

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