buscar_origens_contato

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It does not mention whether the search returns all results at once or paginates, what the default behavior is with empty parameters, or any rate limits. Only a basic search functionality is implied.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no fluff. The key information is front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description only provides a minimal hint (use for OriginId). It does not explain the output format or how to interpret results; thus, it's incomplete for effective use without prior knowledge.

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 three parameters (id, nome, pagina) with no descriptions. The tool description does not explain what these parameters mean or how they affect the search. With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate.

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 for contact origins in Ploomes CRM. It provides a specific use case: obtaining the OriginId for creating or updating a customer. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with other entities.

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 includes a note on when to use the tool (to get OriginId), but does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other lookup needs. Some guidance is present, but it's limited.

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