consultar_certidao_federal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior fully. It states the tool 'orients' and 'provides URLs and alternatives', but does not clarify if it actually performs the consultation or returns static guidance. No mention of side effects, read-only nature, or authentication needs.

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?

Two sentences: first states the purpose and target resource, second adds key details (URLs, automation alternatives). No redundant information, front-loaded with main action.

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?

The tool has an output schema but the description does not explain the return value structure (e.g., URLs, guidance text). It does not specify if the tool queries external services or returns static info. Given moderate complexity, more detail is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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 100% coverage (parameter described as CPF/CNPJ with format notes). The description mentions CNPJ/CPF but adds no new details beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states it guides on consulting a specific certificate (CND) for CNPJ/CPF, providing URLs and automation alternatives. This clearly identifies the resource and action, but the verb 'orients' is slightly ambiguous as to whether the tool performs the query directly. It distinguishes from sibling tools like consultar_certidao_fgts by the certificate type.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons with siblings. The distinction is only implied by the certificate name.

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