abuseipdb_blacklist

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that an API key is required and that it fetches a blacklist, but it omits important context such as return format, pagination, rate limits, and whether the tool purely reads data. This is insufficient for a tool without annotation coverage.

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 entire description is a single, grammatically correct sentence that immediately states the action and object. It includes the essential prerequisite in the second half, with no wasted words.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema and annotations, the description should explain what the response contains and any operational constraints. It does neither—only the blacklist concept and API key requirement are stated, leaving the agent without sufficient context for expected outputs.

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?

The input schema fully describes both parameters (limit and confidence) with their defaults, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The free-text description adds no additional information about these parameters, 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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and names a concrete resource: 'AbuseIPDB's blacklist of the most reported malicious IP addresses.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like abuseipdb_check and abuseipdb_reports.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to choose this tool over its alternatives. It only notes the API key requirement, which is a prerequisite, not a usage criterion.

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