consultar_simples_nacional

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

The description states that the tool performs a query and returns status and dates, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention side effects, error conditions, or handling of invalid CNPJs, and there are no annotations to supplement this.

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 brief, direct, and free of unnecessary information. Two sentences effectively convey the purpose and expected output without redundancy.

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?

For a simple query tool with one parameter, the description is adequately complete: it identifies the input and specifies the returned data. It lacks only explicit usage context, but that is already covered under usage_guidelines.

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 only parameter, cnpj, is described with sufficient detail: it must have 14 digits and may be formatted or unformatted. This fully covers the schema-provided description and adds useful validation context.

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 the tool's main purpose: to check whether a company is enrolled in Simples Nacional or MEI, and lists the specific output fields (current status, option date, exclusion date). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like consultar_cnpj or consultar_empresa_completa.

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 does not indicate when to use this tool instead of related tools such as consultar_status_mei or compare_tax_regimes. No conditions, prerequisites, or recommended scenarios are provided.

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