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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Consulta' implies a read-only lookup, but the description does not state permission requirements, rate limits, or other operational constraints; the output schema covers return values but not safety context.

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 two sentences with no wasted wording. Purpose and the key usage constraint are front-loaded before the exclusion guidance.

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 values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, primary use case, and alternatives, though it leaves the optional tabela parameter semantically unaddressed and provides no behavioral context beyond implying a read query.

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 compensate. It adds meaning for codigo as the TUSS procedure and for UF, modalidade, porte and semestre as comparison dimensions, but it does not explain the tabela parameter and gives no allowed-value guidance beyond schema patterns.

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: querying ANS D-TISS unit reference values by TUSS procedure. It also distinguishes the tool from operator-price and glosa use cases, so an agent can identify its role among siblings.

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?

It explicitly provides both 'Quando usar' and 'Quando não usar', including the alternative category: operator tools for glosa or contracted prices. The comparison dimensions UF, modalidade, porte and semestre are also named.

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