Buscar países por nome

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is well covered. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond this: case-insensitive search, multilingual search (Portuguese, English, Spanish), and the return content (ISO codes and location). No contradiction 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 concise, with a front-loaded purpose statement followed by clearly labeled sections (Parâmetros, Retorna, Exemplo). Every sentence adds value, and the structure makes it easy to scan.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the return format (list with ISO codes and location), provides an example, and clarifies search behavior. Combined with the strong annotations, the agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the result correctly.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying that the search term works across three languages and that the search is case-insensitive, which are not present in the schema's parameter description.

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 action: 'Busca países cujo nome contenha o termo especificado' — a specific verb (search) and resource (countries) with a defined scope. It also differentiates from siblings by noting its utility for finding ISO codes before consulting detailed info, which is distinct from listing or obtaining country details.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Útil para encontrar código ISO de um país antes de consultar informações detalhadas.' This implies when to use it (for ISO lookup) but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. That fits 'clear context, no exclusions.'

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