malpedia_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose an auth need ('Requires MALPEDIA_API_KEY for full access'), which is useful. However, it does not mention output format, pagination, rate limits, or what happens without the API key, leaving notable behavioral gaps.

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 short and front-loaded with the action. The second sentence adds context about Malpedia's authority and the API key requirement, though the authority claim is not strictly necessary for invocation. Overall, it is concise with minimal waste.

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, the description is adequate but incomplete. There is no output schema, yet the description does not explain what the search returns or how results relate to malpedia_actor_profile and malpedia_family_profile. An agent can invoke it, but return expectations are left implicit.

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 query and type are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Search Malpedia for threat actors and malware families.' This clearly identifies the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like malpedia_actor_profile or malpedia_family_profile, so differentiation is left to the agent.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as malpedia_actor_profile, malpedia_family_profile, or other threat-intel search tools. The only operational note is the API key requirement, which is a prerequisite rather than a usage criterion.

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