Lista Andamentos/publicações/atualizações do processo (OData /Updates). Filtre com $filter/$top/$skip/$orderby/$expand.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| $top | No | ||
| $skip | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| $count | No | ||
| $expand | No | ||
| $filter | No | ||
| $select | No | ||
| $orderby | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description is consistent with these annotations and does not introduce contradictions, though it adds no extra behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.
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 a single concise sentence that includes the resource and key filtering options without unnecessary words or repetition.
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?
Without an output schema, the description does nothing to indicate the return structure or pagination details. It gives the core purpose but lacks context on expected results, making it minimally adequate for a straightforward list operation.
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?
The schema has 8 parameters but no descriptions. The description mentions only a subset (filter, top, skip, orderby, expand) without explaining their semantics or the 'query' parameter, leaving significant gaps in compensation for the lack of schema descriptions.
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 that the tool lists updates (movements/publications) of a process and mentions the OData /Updates endpoint, which distinguishes it from other list tools. However, it could be more specific about what 'updates' entails.
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 filtering options ($filter, $top, $skip, $orderby, $expand) but does not explain when to use this tool versus other list tools (e.g., legalone_list_appointments). No alternative or exclusion guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.