breachLatest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the endpoint is free and requires no API key, which is useful access information. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only, mention rate limits, or describe the response format, leaving some behavioral details unaddressed.

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. The core purpose ('Get the most recently added data breach') comes first, followed by the access note. Every word adds value with no redundancy or 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 tool with no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and access requirements. It could add a note about the response format, but the simplicity of the tool and the clarity of 'data breach' make this a minor gap. The description is complete enough for an AI to select and invoke correctly.

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 has zero parameters, and the description correctly adds no parameter information. Per the rubric, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4. The description does not undermine this by implying non-existent parameters.

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 resource ('most recently added data breach'), explicitly identifying the source (HaveIBeenPwned). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like breachList (lists all breaches) and breachGet (retrieves a specific breach) by focusing on the latest addition.

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 implies the usage context: use this when you need the most recent breach. It also adds access conditions ('Free endpoint, no API key required'), which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a full usage guideline.

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