Alias of search_vendors for ChatGPT Deep Research connectors. Returns matching Florida food vendors as results with id, title, and url. Pass the id to fetch for the full record.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Business name, license number, or Florida city |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It states the tool returns results with id, title, and url, implying a read operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm it is read-only, mention authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. The alias hint adds some context but leaves gaps.
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 two sentences long, each sentence serving a distinct purpose: first explains the alias and context, second describes the output and next steps. No excess words, and it is front-loaded with the primary purpose.
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 no output schema, the description covers the return format (id, title, url) and the follow-up action (use fetch for full record). It provides sufficient context for basic usage. However, it lacks details on pagination, error handling, or what constitutes a 'match', but for a simple alias tool this is adequate.
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 100% for the single parameter 'query', which describes acceptable inputs. The description adds context about what the results contain but does not enhance the parameter meaning beyond the schema. 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?
Description clearly states it is an alias of search_vendors for ChatGPT Deep Research connectors and returns matching Florida food vendors. The verb 'search' and resource 'vendors' are explicit. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling 'search_vendors' beyond being an alias, and the title is null.
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 mentions it is for ChatGPT Deep Research connectors, providing a usage context, and advises passing the id to fetch for the full record. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_vendors' or 'fetch', nor does it mention any prerequisites or scenarios to avoid.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: vendor search, scorecard retrieval, checking improvement, event listing, checklist retrieval, platform info, signup link, and vendor decision. Aliases (fetch/search) are explicitly described as shortcuts, not overlapping tools.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_scorecard, list_open_events). The aliases 'fetch' and 'search' break this pattern but are clearly documented as alternatives for specific connectors, not primary tool names.
12 tools is well-scoped for the server's purpose: covering vendor search, scorecard, decision, events, checklists, and platform setup. Each tool serves a necessary function without bloat.
The tool set covers core workflows: vendor discovery, compliance checking, checklist guidance, and event information. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for submitting vendor applications, but that is handled via web app links).
