sei_pesquisar_hipoteses_legais

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description carries less burden. It adds that the tool is needed for certain access levels, but doesn't detail pagination or other behavioral traits. No contradiction with 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 to the point, with examples. No unnecessary words. Could integrate parameter examples more clearly but still effective.

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?

With output schema present, return values are covered. Description explains purpose and usage context. Missing parameter details for pagination, which is important for a search tool. Adequate but not fully complete.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage for 3 parameters. The description provides example search terms ("pessoal", "controle interno"), which helps with 'filtro' but does not explain 'limit' or 'pagina'. Partial compensation but significant gap.

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 searches legal hypotheses available in SEI, with specific verb (pesquisa) and resource (hipóteses legais). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sei_pesquisar_processos by focusing on legal hypotheses for restricted access.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: when creating processes/documents with restricted or secret access. Also explains how to use the result (pass 'id' to sei_criar_processo). Does not list alternatives but context is clear.

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