Processos Por Parte Djen

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the key trait: results are limited to cases that appeared in DJEN publications, with sigilosos and pre-DJEN cases excluded, and output grouped by process number. It does not discuss cost/latency of scanning pages or whether matching is fuzzy or exact.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the mechanism (busca por publicações, agrupamento por número) and the disclaimer. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the main caveat about DJEN coverage is disclosed. Minor gaps remain around match precision and the effect of max_paginas on recall, which matter for a scan-based search tool.

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 each parameter (nome_parte, tribunal, datas, max_paginas) is already documented. The description only reinforces that the search is by nome and does not add format or matching semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — finding a person's or company's lawsuits — and names the search key (nome da parte) and data source (publicações do DJEN), which implicitly separates it from number-based sibling buscar_processo_por_numero and from buscas de comunicações como buscar_comunicacoes_djen.

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?

Gives explicit when-not conditions: it does not cover processos sem publicação no DJEN, sigilosos ou anteriores ao DJEN. It lacks a direct pointer to the alternative sibling (e.g., buscar_processo_por_numero when the number is already known), so guidance is strong but not complete.

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