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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: default page size of 20, max 50, offset-based continuation, and a TotalGeral indicator for detecting truncation. It does not discuss empty-result or error semantics.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the anti-duplicate guidance, then a clearly labeled PAGINACAO block. Every sentence carries actionable information with no 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?

An output schema exists, so return format needn't be spelled out, yet the description still surfaces TotalGeral as the truncation signal, which is exactly what an agent needs to page correctly. The unexplained TipoBusca parameter is the one remaining gap for a 4-parameter tool.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it explains Termo's accepted formats (codigo/NCM 8 digits/GTIN 8-14 digits/partial description), Limite's default and ceiling, and Offset's purpose. TipoBusca is never explained, leaving one of four parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb (Pesquisa) and resource (produto no cadastro da empresa logada), plus the accepted search keys (codigo interno, NCM, GTIN/EAN, descricao parcial). This clearly separates it from the sibling write tools produto_criar and produto_editar.

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?

Explicitly says to run this BEFORE creating new products to avoid duplicates, which is the exact decision point against produto_criar. It also gives concrete continuation guidance: if TotalGeral exceeds the returned matches, request more pages rather than inventing/grouping results.

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