buscar_schema

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states the parameter and possible values, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or describes the response format. Minimal disclosure.

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 very concise with two clear sections (objective and parameters), no filler, and the objective is front-loaded. 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?

The description covers the parameter well but omits what the response contains (e.g., field definitions, types). Given no output schema, this is a gap. It is adequate for basic usage but not fully complete.

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 for the 'entidade' parameter. The description adds concrete possible values (Contacts, Users, Deals, Tasks, InteractionRecords, Tags), which significantly aids understanding beyond the bare 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 'Buscar o schema de uma entidade' (search the schema of an entity) and specifies the system (Ploomes CRM). It distinguishes from sibling tools that search actual records (e.g., buscar_clientes) by focusing on schema retrieval.

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 implies usage when needing entity structure, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid, nor mention alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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