search_vendors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and reach profile is covered. The description usefully adds that matching is typeahead-style name lookup, but says nothing about result limits, pagination, ordering, or whether a default category limits breadth.

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?

A single tight sentence with the search mechanism and scoping constraint front-loaded and no filler. Nothing needs to be trimmed and the key differentiator ('typeahead') is prominent.

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 read-only search with full schema coverage and a clear open-world annotation, the description covers the essentials of what the tool does and how it matches. The only omission is result behavior (limits, ordering), which is minor for a typeahead lookup.

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%, so both query and taxonomy_key are already fully documented, including the category examples and default. The description only restates that the search is by name within a category, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 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?

The description names a specific verb (search), resource (vendors), the matching mode (by name, typeahead) and the scoping constraint (within a vendor category). It is clear what the tool does, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling list_vendors, which an agent must infer from the word '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?

'(typeahead)' implies the intended use case of incremental lookup while typing, and 'within a vendor category' implies a scoping prerequisite. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over list_vendors, nor any exclusion or alternative named.

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