buscar_templates_proposta

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the purpose without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, potential side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 short and to the point, with no extraneous content. However, it is overly minimal and omits critical details about parameters and behavior. Conciseness is good, but at the cost of completeness.

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 presence of 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It only states a single use case (obtaining TemplateId) but does not explain how to use the parameters for filtering or pagination. A more detailed description is needed to fully inform the agent.

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 description makes no mention of any of the three parameters (id, nome, pagina). With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. A baseline of 1 is appropriate as it fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'buscar' and resource 'templates de propostas' in the context of Ploomes CRM. The second sentence specifies the use case: obtaining TemplateId when creating proposals. This distinguishes it from other tools by being specific to proposal templates.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this tool to get TemplateId when creating proposals. While it provides clear context, it does not mention when not to use it or differentiate from similar sibling tools like buscar_templates_documentos. However, the instruction is sufficiently directive.

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