tickets_by_month

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that this is a read-only aggregation, nor does it explain the default 12-month window or how as_of affects results, leaving important behavior undisclosed.

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 short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and a compact usage hint. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is incomplete for a tool with three parameters and no schema descriptions or annotations. It omits the meaning of as_of, the default value and effect of months, and the read-only aggregation behavior.

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 0%, and the description only clarifies the optional city filter. It says nothing about the as_of parameter or how the months parameter controls the reporting window, so two of three parameters remain semantically undocumented.

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 states a specific metric and resource: monthly ticket volume by category, optionally filtered by city. It is clear what the tool computes, but it does not distinguish itself from siblings like ticket_stats or sales_by_month.

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 phrase 'Bom para achar picos' gives a useful usage context for peak detection. However, it does not name alternatives, exclusions, or when to use ticket_stats or overview instead.

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