getVendors

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, or output characteristics. The full burden falls on the description, which is completely silent on these aspects.

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?

At two words, the description is severely under-specified for the tool's purpose. Conciseness should not sacrifice necessary information; this level of brevity fails to earn its place by leaving critical gaps.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters, no output schema, and many sibling list tools, the description is woefully incomplete. It provides no context about what vendors are, how results are ordered, or any constraints, making it insufficient for correct selection and 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both offset and limit parameters. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides adequate meaning. 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 'List vendors.' is a tautology of the tool name 'getVendors'. It restates the name without adding any specificity or distinguishing it from numerous siblings like listAppointments, listCalls, or listLeads.

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 usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool over other list tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent has no context for selection among similar siblings.

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