search_approved_suppliers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states 'Search', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, authentication needs, or limits. The description is insufficient for the agent to understand the tool's behavior beyond its basic function.

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?

While the description is a single sentence and concise, it is under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters and no schema descriptions. It lacks necessary detail, making it insufficient for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 7 undocumented parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not address return format, error handling, required permissions, or how to construct effective queries. The agent lacks critical context for proper usage.

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 0%, meaning the input schema provides no explanations for the 7 parameters (q, item, limit, offset, status, supplier, procurement_bu). The description adds no information about these parameters, failing to clarify their purpose or expected values. This is a critical gap.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'approved supplier list' within 'Oracle Fusion Procurement'. It indicates a specific subset of suppliers, distinguishing it from sibling tool 'search_suppliers' which likely covers all suppliers. However, it could be more explicit about the scope and differentiation.

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 like 'search_suppliers' or other search tools. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit direction.

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