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

The annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds useful behavioral context by specifying the endpoint and noting that the upstream rejects invalid tipo_identificador values with HTTP 500.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no redundant or extraneous text. The endpoint and identifier format are presented in a compact, scannable structure.

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 output schema exists, the description does not need to enumerate return fields. It includes enough invocation context: the endpoint, accepted identifier formats, and pagination defaults are covered by the schema. A short note on how this tool differs from sibling item-listing tools would make it fully complete.

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 input schema already describes all four parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds concrete examples for id_contratacao and clarifies the effect of tipo_identificador, which goes beyond the schema and helps the agent construct valid requests.

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 the tool's purpose: listing items for a specific 14.133 procurement, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like compras_contratacoes_14133_itens_listar, but the phrase 'contratação 14.133 específica' conveys the scoped nature.

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 provides useful usage details, such as the endpoint and the two accepted identifier formats. However, it does not explain when to prefer this tool over related alternatives, such as the general item listing tool or the results-by-procurement tool.

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