enrich_bom

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it enriches with data but does not disclose whether it modifies the input, returns enriched data, or any side effects. No mention of authentication, rate limits, or what happens with missing parts.

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 a single sentence of 11 words, very concise. It avoids redundancy. However, it is so brief that critical details are omitted, balancing conciseness against completeness. For a 3-param tool, it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 (nested array input, optional suppliers list, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It provides no information about return values, error handling, or parameter constraints. An AI agent would lack guidance on how to use the tool correctly.

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%, yet the description adds no meaning to the parameters. It does not explain 'items', 'suppliers', or 'pricingQuantity'. The schema provides basic structure, but the description fails to clarify expected input format, defaults, or constraints beyond what schema implies.

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: enrich BOM-like rows with supplier availability, pricing, and sourcing caveats. The verb 'enrich' and resource 'BOM-like rows' are specific, and the enrichments are listed. It distinguishes from siblings like 'lookup_part' (single part lookup) and 'compare_parts' (comparison) by focusing on batch enrichment.

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 implies usage when you have a list of parts needing supplier data, but no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like 'lookup_part' or 'suggest_alternates'. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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