senado_discursos_senador

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false. The description adds value by explaining the return structure (codigoSenador, tipo, count, discursos with fields), stating that no full text is provided, and clarifying behavior for different tipo values (discursos vs apartes). This goes 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 a single coherent paragraph, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameter explanation, output format, cross-tool references. Not overly long, but packed with information. Could be slightly more structured, but very efficient.

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 complexity (5 params, output schema described), the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, parameters, output, and cross-tool usage. Does not mention error handling or pagination, but for a list tool with annotations, it is adequate.

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 100%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by explaining the tipo parameter choices and default, and clarifying that dataInicio/dataFim are for period filtering. It also mentions casa filter in the purpose sentence. Adds value beyond schema descriptions.

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 it lists pronouncements of a senator, with filters. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing senado_listar_senadores for codigoSenador and senado_discurso_texto for full text, implying this tool is for listing per-senator speeches.

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?

Provides clear context: use when you need pronouncements of a specific senator, filterable by period and house. Mentions alternative for full text (senado_discurso_texto) and prerequisite (senado_listar_senadores). Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is strong.

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