ibge_cidades

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has rate limits, or requires authentication. The description implies a query tool but lacks explicit statements about side effects or permissions.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, bullet points for features and indicators, and separate examples. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, with no unnecessary repetition.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description covers main use cases, indicator list, and examples. It lacks details on pagination or error handling, but overall provides sufficient context for agent usage.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by providing examples of parameter combinations and listing available indicator names, which aids parameter selection beyond the schema.

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 queries municipal indicators from IBGE, similar to the Cidades@ portal. It lists features and provides examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ibge_municipios or ibge_indicadores by being a general query tool for municipal data.

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 clear context on what the tool does and includes examples of different query types. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus sibling tools or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer from the feature list.

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