list_vendors

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnly, non-destructive). Description adds output details: top 200 vendors with total CVE counts, providing context beyond annotations.

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 with no fluff. Every word adds value, front-loaded with core action and result.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and output. No gaps for this simple tool.

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?

No parameters, so the description has nothing to add. Baseline 4 per rubric for 0 params.

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 it lists vendors ranked by vulnerability count, returns top 200 with CVE counts, and differentiates from siblings like list_authors or list_products by focusing on vendors.

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 mentions when to use: for questions about most vulnerable vendors or threat landscape. Does not mention when not to use, but its specificity suffices.

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