Ficha do processo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral information: it requires a BITBUSCA_API_KEY, and it discloses which sections are returned. It stops short of saying whether "últimos movimentos" is truncated or how failures (invalid CNJ, missing key) surface.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the operational prerequisite before the functional description. Nothing is repeated and nothing is wasted.

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 read-only, single-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers the credential requirement and the shape of the returned data. Minor gaps remain around error behavior and the pointer to como_ativar_avancado for obtaining the key.

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% and the single parameter is documented as "Número CNJ do processo (20 dígitos)". The description's "de um processo" adds no format or constraint detail 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?

"Mostra capa e movimentações de um processo" names a specific verb and resource and even enumerates the returned sections (classe, assuntos, órgão, últimos movimentos), so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not explicitly contrast with the similarly named ficha_advogado / ficha_imovel, but the target resource (a court case) is unambiguous.

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 bracketed prerequisite "Avançado: exige BITBUSCA_API_KEY" tells the agent a credential is required, which is real usage context. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over siblings such as buscar_editais_bitbusca or como_ativar_avancado when the key is missing; usage must be inferred from the resource name.

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