dicionario

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

The description notes that the tool has no parameters and is free (no API key required), which are important behavioral traits. It does not explicitly mention that the tool has no side effects, but for a read-only dictionary lookup this is implicit.

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 concise and well-structured. It provides essential information, including the exact output content and the distinction from a sibling tool, without unnecessary verbosity.

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 that the tool has no parameters and the output is a JSON dictionary, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns and how it differs from the alternative. No critical context is missing.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so there is nothing to misinterpret or clarify. The description correctly states 'Sem parâmetros' and the schema confirms an empty properties object.

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 tool's purpose: it provides a technical dictionary of indicators, including formulas, CVM account codes, and the profit line used. It also distinguishes this JSON definition from the 'metodologia' alternative.

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 contrasts this tool with 'metodologia', indicating that this one returns JSON definitions for programmatic consumption while the other provides readable explanatory text. This gives clear guidance on when to choose this tool over the sibling.

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