consultar_finalidade_transferencia

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

The description labels the operation as a query ('Consulta'), which implies read-only behavior, and restricts scope to a specific bank. With no annotations, it would benefit from disclosing more about return format, error behavior, or whether the code must be exact, but it provides basic transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the action, resource, and scope.

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?

The tool is relatively simple and the description conveys its core purpose, but with no output schema or annotations, it is missing details about the response contents and the meaning of the 'codigo' parameter. It is minimally adequate but leaves noticeable gaps.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only connects 'banco específico' to 'codigo_banco' and alludes to CNAB, but it does not explain what 'codigo' represents or its expected format.

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 identifies the action ('Consulta'), the resource ('finalidade de transferência (CNAB)'), and the scope ('de um banco específico'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'listar_finalidades_transferencia', which implies listing all purposes rather than retrieving one.

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 implies the tool should be used when a single transfer purpose for a specific bank is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention the sibling list tool.

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