abuseipdb_blacklist

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states the requirement for an API key. It does not mention if the operation is read-only, rate limits, response format, or pagination behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a requirement. Every sentence is necessary and there is no fluff.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose and the key prerequisite. It could be improved by briefly mentioning the return format (e.g., list of IPs) but is sufficient for basic understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both parameters with descriptions and defaults. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states it gets a blacklist of malicious IPs from AbuseIPDB, using the verb 'Get' and specifying the resource as 'AbuseIPDB's blacklist'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like abuseipdb_check (individual IP check) and abuseipdb_reports.

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 mentions the requirement of an API key, but does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for bulk retrieval vs individual checks). No exclusions or alternative tool names are given.

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