vdb_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool performs a free-text search; it does not mention result format, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. The behavior is minimally transparent and leaves the agent guessing about what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 (one sentence) but under-specified. While brevity is good, the lack of structured information (e.g., parameter details, usage context, output expectations) makes it insufficiently informative. The sentence is not front-loaded with the most critical operational details.

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 that there are no annotations, no output schema, and only a bare input schema with two parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not tell an agent how to form an effective query, what the limit parameter means, or what the response will look like. The tool is simple, but the description still leaves critical gaps for correct invocation.

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%, and the description does not elaborate on the parameters. It implies 'query' is the search text and 'limit' likely caps results, but this is not explicitly stated. The description adds almost no value beyond what the raw schema shows, failing to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('search') and a specific resource ('VDB vulnerability corpus'), making the tool's core function clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vdb_check_package and vdb_lookup by indicating a free-text search rather than a structured check or exact lookup, though it does not explicitly contrast with those.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many vdb_* siblings. There is no mention of typical use cases, when to prefer it over vdb_lookup or vdb_check_package, or any exclusions. An agent is left to infer context from the tool name and minimal description.

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