Armazéns (MRP)

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

Annotations are absent, so the description bears full responsibility. It indicates a read-only operation ('Consulta') and includes a caveat that the database may be empty. However, it lacks explicit safety disclosure, rate limit info, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not confirmed.

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 two sentences plus a short note, with no extraneous information. The core purpose is stated first, followed by usage patterns and a caveat. Every sentence adds value.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the main retrieval modes and warns about empty results. It does not detail the output format or fields, but the schema covers parameter details. Some minor gaps remain, but overall it is sufficient for a simple query tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, but the tool description adds critical usage semantics: the interaction between branchId and code for retrieving a specific warehouse versus omitting them for a list. This goes beyond individual parameter descriptions in the schema.

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 queries MRP warehouses (Consulta os armazéns do MRP) and explains two modes: without ID returns a list, with branchId+code returns a specific warehouse. This differentiates it from sibling tools, which cover different entities like products or stock balances.

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 explains two distinct usage patterns (list vs. specific warehouse via branchId+code), providing clear guidance on parameter combinations. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or mention when not to use it. The sibling tools are clearly separate resources, so the guidance is adequate.

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