detalhar_contratacao

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers little: nothing about read-only nature, permissions, behavior when a contratação is not found, or rate limits. 'Detalhe completo' only hints at read semantics and is not a disclosure of traits.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the input-provenance hint. Every sentence earns its place.

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 description covers the required input chain adequately. It leaves out what the tool does not return (items, arquivos, resultados are separate siblings) and any failure behavior, which keeps it from being complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning to the bare titles by identifying cnpj as the órgão's CNPJ and sequencial as a sequential number, and it names their provenance, but it gives no expected formats (punctuation, ranges) for any of the three parameters.

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 ('Detalhe completo de uma contratação do PNCP') plus the three identifying keys, so an agent knows this is a detail lookup rather than a list. It does not, however, distinguish itself from other contratação-scoped siblings such as 'listar_itens_contratacao' or 'listar_arquivos_contratacao'.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent where the three required values come from ('Esses três campos vêm em listar_oportunidades_abertas'), which sets up the correct call sequence. No when-not condition or explicit alternative is given, so it stops short of a full routing rule.

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