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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool returns (detailed vendor info and reports), which covers the core behavior. However, it does not mention potential errors (e.g., invalid slug), permissions, or whether it is read-only, leaving some behavioral 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, with the purpose front-loaded and a concise usage note. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy or filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does (returns vendor details and reports) and when to use it (after candidate search). It does not describe return structure or error handling, but the tool's simplicity makes the description nearly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the 'slug' parameter with examples. The description only repeats 'by slug' and does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Thus the 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: retrieving detailed info for a specific vendor by slug, including all reports. It distinguishes this from siblings by emphasizing 'specific vendor' and 'all of their reports', and explicitly ties it to a follow-up step after search or list_vendors_by_industry.

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 an explicit usage trigger: 'Use after `search` or `list_vendors_by_industry` returns a candidate.' This clearly indicates when to invoke the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for different scenarios, so it stops short of a full 5.

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