senado_reunioes_comissao

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

The description implies a read-only operation (listing) and covers both scheduled and held meetings, which is a behavioral detail. However, with no annotations, it lacks disclosure of permissions, rate limits, or side effects.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and output without redundancy. Every word is necessary.

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?

No output schema is provided; the description mentions output fields (date, time, location, agenda) but does not specify format or additional fields. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The description focuses on output rather than parameter semantics, which is acceptable given full schema coverage.

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 the verb 'Lista' and the resource 'reuniões de comissão', specifying the output includes date, time, location, and agenda. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'senado_agenda_comissoes' by focusing on committee meetings with detailed information.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or context for choosing this tool over similar ones like 'senado_agenda_comissoes'.

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