list_vendors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should compensate. It does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, requires no side effects, or any authentication needs. It only lists parameters without behavioral context like return format or performance implications.

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: a one-line purpose statement followed by a clean, bullet-like argument list with explanations. Every sentence is necessary and there is no redundancy.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description does not mention the return format (e.g., list of vendor objects) or any potential errors. It is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks completeness regarding the response structure.

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?

Although schema coverage is 0%, the description adds meaningful parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Number of records to skip', 'Sort order (asc or desc)') that clarify the purpose and expected values beyond the schema's type and default. This helps an agent understand how to use skip, limit, sort_by, and sort_order.

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 'List vendors with pagination and sorting,' which specifies the verb (list) and resource (vendors). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_vendor, get_vendor, etc., and mentions specific features (pagination, sorting).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where another tool (e.g., get_vendor for a single vendor) would be more appropriate.

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