senado_orientacao_bancada

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds detailed return structure (count, votacoes with fields), which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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?

Single paragraph, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second describes output structure, third gives input guidance, fourth points to sibling. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Completeness is high: purpose, return format, input options, and alternative tool are all explained. Output schema exists, but description further details fields. Input parameters fully described in schema and clarified in description.

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 3 parameters are covered in schema (100% coverage). Description adds critical semantic guidance: input either 'data' (single day) OR the period 'dataInicio'/'dataFim', clarifying mutual exclusivity not present in 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves party leadership orientation in plenary votes with vote tallies, specifically for party discipline analysis. It distinguishes from sibling tool senado_resultado_plenario by mentioning that tool is for session results.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (for orientation and placar) and when not to (for session results, use senado_resultado_plenario). Directly names an alternative tool, providing clear guidance.

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