sei_listar_credenciamentos

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds version requirements and an error troubleshooting suggestion but does not disclose details about behavior on missing inputs, permission failures, or side effects. This meets baseline with minor added context.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences plus version and error lines. It is front-loaded with the main action. The version info is slightly tangential but not overly verbose.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description adequately covers purpose and version context. It omits prerequisites (e.g., user access) but is otherwise sufficient for a straightforward read-only list tool.

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 coverage is 0% with no property descriptions. The description only implies that 'processo' identifies the process, but provides no format, requirements, or additional meaning. This is insufficient compensation for the missing schema detail.

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 lists access credentials for a confidential process. It uses a specific verb (lista) and resource (credenciamentos de acesso a um processo sigiloso), distinguishing it from siblings that grant, renounce, or revoke credentials.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sei_conceder_credenciamento or sei_listar_assinaturas. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information, only a version note and error handling tip.

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