senado_execucao_orcamentaria

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description details the return structure (tipo, modo, ano, totalLinhas, agregado[] or despesas[]/receitas[]), explains aggregation modes, detail mode with limiter and truncation warning, and data ranges. No contradictions 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?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides return structure details, usage guidelines, and sibling disambiguation. Every sentence is informative and earns its place, with no wasted words.

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 has 4 parameters with enums, an output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers return format, parameter combinations, data ranges, limit behavior, and truncation warning. It is complete enough for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), but the description adds value by explaining which modo values apply to which tipo, the default limit behavior, and suggesting filtering by ano before detalhe. The description enriches the schema information.

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 that the tool retrieves budget execution data for the Senate (despesas and receitas), specifies the data ranges, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool senado_orcamento_parlamentar. It uses specific verbs and resource names, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 on when to use different parameter combinations (e.g., tipo=despesas with modo values, filtering by ano before using detalhe) and clearly warns not to confuse with senado_orcamento_parlamentar. This helps the agent choose the tool correctly.

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