ransomwareSearch

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only describes the search functionality without mentioning any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or result limits. The description is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey the purpose, matching criteria, and use case without any filler or redundant information.

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 search tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what it searches, what fields it matches, and provides a typical use case. Minor gap: it does not specify the format or scope of results.

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 the parameter 'keyword' is described in the schema. The description adds value by clarifying that matches occur against 'victim names, descriptions, and other fields,' which is not explicitly stated in the schema.

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 the verb 'Search', the resource 'ransomware victims', and specifies matching fields (victim names, descriptions, etc.). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like ransomwareByCountry or ransomwareBySector by focusing on keyword search.

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 provides a clear use case: 'checking if a specific company has been listed as a victim.' It implies alternatives (e.g., other ransomware tools) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or differentiate from all siblings.

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