senado_terceirizados

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the full list is downloaded and filtered in the Worker, and results are limited with a truncation warning, providing useful behavioral context 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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence covers purpose, filterability, and return structure. Second sentence adds technical details and sibling reference. Highly 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 annotations and output schema (though not shown in input, description lists fields), the description is complete for an AI agent to understand what the tool does, how to use it, and what to expect. Includes warning about truncation.

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. The description adds that nome, empresa, lotacao are partial search without accents, and limits the resultado limit to limite with default and maximum. This adds meaningful value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it lists outsourced employees of the Senate, with filtering by name, company, or location. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'senado_empresas_contratadas' by explicitly directing users to that tool for different needs.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (to list outsourced employees with filtering) and when not (for empresa contratante, use 'senado_empresas_contratadas'). This provides clear guidance on alternatives.

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