bazaar_search_tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this is a read-only search operation returning malware samples, which is adequate, but it does not mention result format, pagination, rate limits, or external API behavior. For a simple search tool this is acceptable but not richly transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, source, and search key, then gives useful examples. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant or vague 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 simple two-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is mostly complete. It identifies the source, the search dimension, and example values, and the schema covers the parameters. It could be slightly more complete by noting what fields are returned, but that is not required for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing concrete example tag values ('keylogger', 'ransomware', 'loader'), which helps an agent understand what valid inputs look like. The limit parameter is not described in prose, but the schema already documents it with a default.

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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('MalwareBazaar'), and a specific dimension ('by tag') with concrete examples. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like bazaar_search_family and bazaar_lookup_hash, which search by different keys.

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 clearly implies the tool is for finding MalwareBazaar samples when you have a tag such as 'keylogger' or 'ransomware'. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over family/hash/recents searches.

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