Lista os IDs de eventos financeiros alterados num período (para sync incremental / conciliação). data_inicio e data_fim (YYYY-MM-DD ou ISO date-time). Paginado. Retorna só os IDs; use contaazul_get_installment para o detalhe.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pagina | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| data_fim | No | ||
| data_inicio | No | ||
| tamanho_pagina | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds that only IDs are returned, paginated, and requires a date range. No contradictions.
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?
Short, front-loaded with purpose, then key parameters and behavior. No fluff. Missing parameter docs but still concise.
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?
Explains core functionality and two parameters. Could add brief descriptions for pagination parameters and account. No output schema, so return value is implied but not fully described.
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%. Description adds meaning for 'data_inicio' and 'data_fim' (date format) but ignores 'pagina', 'account', and 'tamanho_pagina'. For a tool with 5 undocumented params, the description should explain more.
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?
Clearly states it lists IDs of changed financial events in a period for incremental sync/reconciliation. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'contaazul_get_installment' and other list tools by focusing on changed events.
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 states usage for incremental sync/reconciliation and directs to use 'contaazul_get_installment' for details. Could be improved by noting when not to use (e.g., if you need full details).
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.