Buscar mensagens

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds that the search uses LIKE and has broad coverage, which implies substring matching across chats, providing some value beyond annotations. However, it doesn't disclose return formats or pagination.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key behavior (LIKE) in a compact format.

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 low complexity but also sparse information, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how chat_id scopes the search, what limit does, or the exact meaning of 'LIKE', leaving an agent uncertain about invocation. The readOnly annotation helps but doesn't cover these operational details.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention query, limit, or chat_id, leaving the agent to infer their meanings from names and defaults. This is insufficient for a 3-parameter tool.

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 the tool performs a text search across messages with 'Busca texto nas mensagens', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_messages or list_chats by implying a content-based search, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The phrase 'cobertura ampla' hints at broad applicability, but there is no explicit mention of when to prefer search_messages over get_messages or list_chats.

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