search_vessels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination (despite limit and nextToken parameters in the schema), result format, rate limits, or any performance implications. The description only lists parameters, omitting critical behavioral traits.

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 14-word sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded, free of fluff, and every word serves a clear role.

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?

With 12 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain pagination, case sensitivity, and result behavior. It does not cover return values or edge cases, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone. The high parameter count demands more completeness.

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 simply echoes the parameter names without adding new meaning (e.g., does not clarify that name and owner support partial matches, which some schema descriptions already note). No additional clarification is provided beyond what the schema offers.

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 clearly states the tool searches for vessels and lists 9 specific search criteria (name, IMO, MMSI, etc.), distinguishing it from single-vessel lookups like get_vessel. The verb 'search' paired with the resource 'vessels' and explicit parameters makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for a single vessel, use get_vessel; for area searches, use get_vessels_in_area). The description lacks any context about preferred use cases or exclusions.

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