buscar_equipes_de_usuarios

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

The description mentions pagination behavior (results limited per page), which is a key behavioral trait. Since no annotations are provided, the description partially covers transparency. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only or if it has destructive side effects, nor does it disclose any authorization requirements.

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, with three bullet points covering key aspects. It is front-loaded with the pagination note. Each sentence serves a purpose, though it could be slightly more formal and directly state the tool's primary action in a single sentence.

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?

Despite moderate complexity and no output schema, the description fails to indicate what the tool returns or its structure. It also omits any prerequisites, required permissions, or error handling. This leaves the agent with incomplete information to fully understand the tool's effect and results.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the purpose of each parameter: 'pagina' for pagination, 'nome_da_equipe' to search by team name, and 'id_usuario_membro' to search by user ID. It also clarifies that only one of the two filters may be used. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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 that the tool searches teams of users, and provides filtering options by team name or user ID. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'salvar_equipe' and 'excluir_equipe' which handle creation/deletion. However, it does not explicitly mention the output structure (e.g., list of teams).

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 gives practical guidance: pagination with the 'pagina' parameter, search by team name or user ID, and a specific instruction for 'minha equipe' queries to use the logged user's ID. It does not, however, explicitly state when not to use this tool compared to other team-related tools.

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