event_business_suspension

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds no extra behavioral context, such as data freshness or pagination, but given the annotations, the minimum is met without contradiction.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence. While it is efficient, it could be slightly more informative, but it is not overly verbose. Front-loading is not an issue due to brevity.

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 simplicity (three parameters, output schema exists, annotations cover read-only), the description is adequately complete for a basic lookup. However, it does not explain the context of 'business suspension' or what the output contains beyond what is in the output schema, leaving some room for improvement.

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 100% description coverage for all three parameters, including format hints. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what is already in the schema, so baseline 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 clearly states it inquires about business suspension, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from many sibling event_* tools that also perform inquiries about various events, so it lacks 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any context about prerequisites. The description fails to indicate scenarios where this tool is appropriate compared to siblings like event_business_acquisition or event_business_disposal.

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