brc_list_suppliers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, supports pagination/filtering, or any side effects. For a list operation, this lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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 short sentence, which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It is front-loaded but insufficient to guide an agent effectively.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not cover return format, pagination behavior, or required parameters, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.

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 schema coverage is 43% (filter, orderBy, companyName have descriptions), but the description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema. It does not explain the required companyName parameter or the pagination parameters (top, page, skip, pageSize) in context.

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 identifies the action (lists) and resource (suppliers), but among sibling tools like brc_list_supplier_account_trans and brc_list_supplier_op_bal_trans, it lacks differentiation to help an agent distinguish which list tool to use.

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 such as brc_get_supplier for a single supplier or other list tools. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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