bazaarTag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two useful facts beyond the annotations: the required ABUSECH_AUTH_KEY credential and the mutually exclusive input constraint. It does not mention rate limits or result paging, keeping it short of a 5.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and source, followed by the invocation constraint and credential requirement. No filler.

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?

For a two-parameter, no-output-schema search tool, the description covers purpose, exclusivity, and auth. The remaining gap is routing against sibling bazaar tools, a minor omission given the simplicity of the 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameter descriptions already state 'provide exactly one of tag or signature'. The description repeats that constraint rather than adding new meaning such as matching behavior or case sensitivity, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource: search MalwareBazaar (abuse.ch) by tag or malware family signature. The source is named, which separates it from sibling sources like threatfoxTag, urlhausTag, and bazaarHash. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the closest siblings (bazaarHash, bazaarRecent), so it stops short of a 5.

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 exactly-one-of constraint tells the agent how to invoke it, but there is no guidance on when to pick this over bazaarHash or bazaarRecent, or whether tag vs signature is preferred for a given intent. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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