pncp_obter_modalidades_por_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Consulta dados públicos' (queries public data), which signals a read-only operation, but provides no context on response format, pagination, error behavior, or whether the 'formato' parameter changes the payload structure. Given there is no output schema, this is a considerable gap.

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 a single, compact sentence that identifies the action, resource, and endpoint path. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler. It loses a point for not adding any searchable context about the data format or parameters.

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?

For a get-by-id reference lookup tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides only the basic purpose. It omits the meaning of the response, the effect of the 'formato' enum, and the relationship to list-style siblings. The endpoint path helps, but the agent still lacks enough context to invoke the tool with confidence.

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 50%: the 'formato' parameter already has a schema description stating 'Formato da resposta: normalizado ou payload original', and the description adds nothing about it. The 'id' parameter is required but only minimally defined as an integer; the description doesn't explain what identifier this refers to (e.g., modality ID) beyond the endpoint path. The description does not compensate for the undocumented half of the parameters.

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 the verb 'Consulta' (queries) and the resource 'modalidades de contratação', plus the endpoint path '/v1/modalidades/{id}' which clarifies this is a get-by-id operation. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish it from the sibling 'pncp_listar_modalidades' (list all) and other similar 'obter_*_por_id' lookup tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention that this is for fetching a single modality by ID, nor does it exclude it from list-oriented siblings like 'pncp_listar_modalidades' or other related PNCP reference endpoints. The agent must infer usage from the endpoint path and naming convention.

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