Lista pessoas (clientes, fornecedores, vendedores, transportadores) cadastradas. Filtros via params: tamanho_pagina, pagina, busca (nome/documento), tipo_perfil, ativo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ativo | No | ||
| busca | No | ||
| pagina | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| tipo_perfil | No | ||
| tamanho_pagina | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, making the tool safe. The description adds filter details but does not contradict annotations. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, pagination limits) are disclosed.
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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, but it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separando função e filtros).
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?
Given the tool has six parameters (zero required) and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and filter options but lacks details on the return structure, pagination behavior, or the purpose of the 'account' parameter. It is adequate but incomplete for complex usage.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description partly compensates by listing five parameters (tamanho_pagina, pagina, busca, tipo_perfil, ativo) and explaining 'busca' as search by name/document. However, it omits the 'account' parameter and does not detail value formats or enums.
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 it lists people (clientes, fornecedores, vendedores, transportadores) with a specific verb 'Lista'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'contaazul_get_person' by the plural resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools beyond the resource name.
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?
The description mentions available filters via params, implying usage context for retrieving people with criteria. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., single retrieval vs. list), nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
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.