get_resultado_federal

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It adds useful context by stating the data is from an official source, curated by deunobicho.online, and under CC-BY-4.0. It does not disclose freshness/caching behavior or clarify that this is a read-only query, though these are less critical for a zero-parameter retrieval tool.

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 concise sentences; the first is front-loaded with the action and resource, and the second adds relevant provenance/license context in minimal words. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description adequately specifies return content (five prizes and corresponding animal groups) and source. A minor gap is the lack of any information about the response structure or how this tool relates to the similarly named sibling.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no schema burden. The description explains what the result contains rather than parameter details, which is the baseline expectation for a parameterless 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retorna o resultado atual da Loteria Federal da Caixa' and adds detail on content ('5 prêmios' and 'grupos correspondentes do jogo do bicho'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling get_resultado_hoje, but the resource is clearly the Federal Lottery.

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 phrase 'resultado atual' gives an implied trigger for use when the agent needs the current official Federal Lottery result. However, it provides no explicit exclusions or comparisons with siblings like get_resultado_hoje or get_calendario_federal, leaving when-not-to-use ambiguous.

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