GET /suppliers/{id}

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of auth requirements, error behavior for unknown IDs, or what the endpoint returns.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the path is redundantly repeated in two formats and the 'Generated from...' provenance sentence contributes no operator-relevant information.

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 lookup tool with no output schema, the description should explain what a supplier record contains or at least that it returns one record by ID. Neither is present, leaving the agent to infer the entire contract from the endpoint string.

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% for the single required 'id' parameter. The description only echoes '{id}' from the path, adding no meaning such as that it is the supplier record identifier, nor any format or range constraints.

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 only restates the HTTP method and path ('GET /suppliers/{id}: /suppliers/:id') and notes it was generated from the OpenAPI operation. It never says in plain language that this retrieves a single supplier record, and it does not distinguish itself from sibling snipeit_gen_suppliers (the list endpoint).

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 call this versus the list endpoint snipeit_gen_suppliers or the generic escape hatch snipeit_raw_request. Usage is only vaguely inferable from the path.

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