Detalhe de um contrato por id (cliente, termos, condição de pagamento, composição de valor).
Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| ids | No | ||
| account | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds bulk execution support, but no additional behavioral context like auth requirements, rate limits, or response structure. Within annotations' context, the description provides moderate added value.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with core purpose. Efficient and no fluff. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Despite annotations and simple schema, description lacks return value information (no output schema) and does not detail parameter semantics. For a read operation with 3 params and no output schema, more details (e.g., response fields, pagination) are needed for 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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. Only 'ids' is loosely explained ('bulk support'); 'id' and 'account' are undocumented. This does not adequately clarify parameter usage or constraints.
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?
Description clearly states it retrieves contract details by ID, listing specific fields (client, terms, payment condition, value composition). Distinguishes from sibling tools like contaazul_list_contracts which list contracts without details.
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?
Implies use when you need a single contract's details or batch by IDs, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Sibling tools exist for other entities but no comparison provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Multiple tools are easily confused: person_write_create/person_write_update and sale_write_create/sale_write_update duplicate the same operation with an internal action flag, and authenticate vs connect both deal with connection setup. Also, list_accounts (company installs) and list_financial_accounts (bank accounts) have similar names but different meanings.
Naming patterns vary widely: verb_noun (create_budget, list_people) is mixed with noun_verb (contract_write, person_delete, product_write). The contaazul_ prefix is applied inconsistently, and standalone names like authenticate, connect, marketplace, and toolkit_info break the pattern. Flattened action pairs add redundant, non-idiomatic names.
With 57 tools, this server exceeds the 50+ threshold for an extreme count. The tool list is bloated with generic platform tools (authenticate, marketplace, report_bug) alongside dozens of domain-specific ones, making it overwhelming for agents to parse and select from.
The Conta Azul domain is well represented: people, products, services, sales, budgets, contracts, financial accounts, receivables/payables, settlements, charges, invoices, and transfers all have read/create/list operations, and most have update/cancel/delete. Minor gaps like product update/delete or service update exist due to API limitations, but the core workflows are covered.