senado_obter_materia

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral details: tramitacao returns a truncated list with count/total and includes an 'aviso' when truncating, and discloses default limits (100 for tramitacao, 50 for textos). 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 detailed and well-structured, grouping information by secao option with inline field lists. While slightly long, every sentence adds value and it is front-loaded with the core purpose. A bulleted list could improve scanability, but current format is 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description fully explains the return structure for all three secao options, including nested objects and arrays. It covers edge cases like truncation and defaults, and references the companion search tool. No gaps identified.

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 three parameters are described in the schema, but the description enriches them significantly: for secao, it explains the return structure per option and the effect of limite; for codigoMateria, it indicates its source; for limite, it clarifys defaults and truncation behavior. This goes well beyond the 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 retrieves data for a matter given a codigoMateria and secao, detailing three distinct sections (detalhe, tramitacao, textos). It also references the companion tool senado_buscar_materias for obtaining the codigoMateria, distinguishing itself from siblings.

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 instructs to use senado_buscar_materias to get codigoMateria and explains the three secao options with their purposes. While it doesn't explicitly exclude other scenarios, the guidance is clear and contextual for this tool's domain.

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