senado_contratacoes_lista

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, consistent with a read operation. The description adds key behavioral details: filter applied server-side, return format per tipo, limit with truncation warning, and non-normalized raw records for 'menores_aprendizes'.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence adds value, though slightly longer than minimal. No redundant phrases.

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 (three tipos, filtering, limiting) and presence of output schema in description, it covers return structure, special cases (empty list, raw records), and limit truncation. Minor omission: no mention of pagination beyond limit.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds meaning by explaining 'filtro' applies to all fields (schema says 'textual') and clarifying 'limite' behavior with 'aviso' when truncated.

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 verb 'Lista' and the resource 'contratações do Senado' with subtypes, and distinguishes from sibling tool 'senado_contratacao_detalhe' by noting 'Para aprofundar uma ata/empenho, use o id em senado_contratacao_detalhe.'

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 explicit guidance: use to list contracts by type with optional filter, and explicitly directs to use 'senado_contratacao_detalhe' for deeper detail. It also mentions behavior when no results exist.

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