Get Fortnox Supplier

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which the description's 'Retrieve' aligns with. The description adds value by enumerating the returned data categories (contact info, addresses, bank details, payment terms), giving more behavioral context than annotations alone.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, an Args block, and a Returns section. Every element earns its place with no filler, and the structure allows quick scanning.

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 simple read-only tool with two parameters and an enum, the description fully covers the purpose, parameters, and return content. It explicitly lists the categories of supplier details returned, which compensates for the lack of an output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description's Args section essentially restates the schema. No additional meaning is added for either parameter beyond what the schema already documents, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('supplier'), and clarifies it targets a specific supplier by number. This distinguishes it from fortnox_list_suppliers (which lists all) and fortnox_get_supplier_invoice (which targets invoices).

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 clearly implies the tool is for fetching a single supplier's details by supplier_number. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like list_suppliers, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select this over sibling tools.

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