get_sonho

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

Annotations are entirely absent, so the description must indicate side effects, error behavior, and data source reliability. It only says "Retorna" (returns), implying a read operation, but does not disclose that it is an external lookup, what happens with an invalid slug, or any rate limits or authorization requirements. The mention of editorial curation on deunobicho.online hints at an external dependency, but not enough.

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 sentence with no filler. The main verb and resource are front-loaded, followed by a colon that enumerates the output content and source attribution. Every phrase provides useful information.

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?

Given it is a simple one-parameter lookup with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core purpose and output structure. However, it lacks usage differentiation from search_sonhos and does not disclose behavioral caveats. It is adequate but not fully 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 100%, so the slug parameter is already well-documented with examples and a link to the full list. The description does not add any extra meaning about the parameter; it focuses on the return content. Baseline 3 applies.

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 returns dream interpretations from the jogo do bicho dream book, with specific content: meaning, animal to play, and gambling numbers. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_resultado_federal and search_sonhos by focusing on a predefined dream interpretation lookup, not results or search.

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 implied: the agent should use this when it has a dream slug and wants the interpretation. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of search_sonhos, nor exclusions or alternative routes. The schema mentions a full list of slugs but does not provide decision context.

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