get_brands

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. It discloses the return content (brands plus their MDR rates), which implies a safe, side-effect-free read, but never states read-only semantics, ordering, or whether the list is exhaustive/paginated.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then the payload. No filler, no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, zero-side-effect listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what it does and what it returns. Minor gaps remain around result ordering and whether the list is complete, but nothing critical to calling it 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 takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline of 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 ('Lista') and resource ('marcas de maquininha disponíveis') and adds the payload ('taxas MDR'), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like compare_brands or get_tiers, which also operate on brand/tier data.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'todas as marcas disponíveis' suggests a discovery/enumeration call, typically a precursor to compare_brands or calculate_cost. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, so the agent must infer the routing.

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