bncc_buscar

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions accent-insensitive search, which adds behavioral insight, but does not explicitly state read-only nature, error handling, or rate limits. The search behavior is implicitly non-destructive, but more detail would improve 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 concise with a single-line summary followed by a clean bulleted list of parameters. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 description covers parameters well but does not describe the output format or return values, which is important given no output schema. For a search tool with six optional parameters, the agent might benefit from knowing the result structure (e.g., list of skill objects).

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 0%, so the description compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, default, and allowed values (e.g., 'ano' accepts range '69'). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema titles and defaults, though some parameters like 'etapa' and 'componente' lack enumerations.

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 states the tool searches for skills by keyword with accent-insensitive matching and optional filters. It uses a specific verb ('busca') and resource ('habilidades'), and the filter parameters distinguish it from siblings like bncc_listar or bncc_lookup.

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 explains filter options but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., bncc_listar, bncc_lookup). It does not state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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