sei_consultar_atribuicao

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds version info but no additional behavioral context (e.g., auth requirements, side effects). Not contradictory, but adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded with purpose. The troubleshooting sentence adds minor overhead but is acceptable. Could be slightly more concise by moving version info elsewhere.

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 simple schema (1 param, output schema exists), description covers the core purpose and provides a helpful error-recovery hint. Lacks mention of returned data structure, but output schema likely covers that.

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%, but the description only implies the parameter is a process identifier. No format details, valid values, or examples. Relies heavily on the parameter name 'processo'.

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?

Description clearly states the tool consults the current assignment of a process ('quem está responsável'), using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from siblings like sei_atribuir_processo (write) or sei_remover_atribuicao (modify).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The troubleshooting tip about sei_versao is tangential. Missing context like 'Use this to check who is currently assigned before making changes.'

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