list_vendors

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context about order sheets and plan restrictions, plus the metadata-only scope. It does not detail response format or pagination, but the simplicity and read-only nature reduce the need.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'List', and each clause earns its place. The description is compact while delivering purpose, context, and a pointer to an alternative.

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 and zero parameters, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose, constraints (metadata only, plan), and relationships to get_vendor. Minor missing details like pagination or field names, but these are not critical for a simple list operation.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters and adds no conflicting info. The statement about metadata and get_vendor clarifies the tool's output without touching parameter semantics.

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 lists the store's fulfillment vendors, defines what vendors are, and distinguishes it from get_vendor by noting 'Metadata only'. This differentiates it from sibling tools and specifies a precise action and resource.

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?

Explicitly directs users to use get_vendor when they need the email template HTML, providing a clear alternative. Also mentions 'Pro/Expert plans', indicating plan-based availability, which gives context on when the tool accessible.

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