ransomwareGroupVictims

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get all victims') and lists return fields, which is sufficient for a straightforward query tool. No contradictory statements.

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 front-loaded sentences with zero waste. Clearly states action, resource, and return data without unnecessary details.

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 single-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and return fields. Could mention potential large result sets or rate limits, but not essential for basic use.

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 already provides parameter description with examples ('e.g. 'lockbit3', 'clop', 'blackcat''). The tool description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema offers, so baseline 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 clearly states 'Get all victims claimed by a specific ransomware group', specifying the verb and resource, and lists return fields (names, countries, sectors, publication dates). It differentiates from sibling tools like 'ransomwareByCountry' and 'ransomwareGroup' by focusing on victims of a specific group.

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?

Usage is implied from the tool name and description, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like 'ransomwareSearch' or when not to use. Lacks exclusions or context for selection.

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