Configurar prestador

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

The description discloses that the tool writes to a specific file, does not save tokens or passwords, and that the emitter must be a legal entity (CNPJ) with CPF rejected. These details go beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false) to add safety and constraint context.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and usage. Every sentence adds distinct information without redundancy: first sentence states the action and location, second provides usage timing and limitations.

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 configuration tool with 7 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, the description covers main purpose, timing, and a critical safety note (no token/password). It lacks details on error handling or prerequisites but overall provides sufficient context.

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?

With schema coverage at 71%, the description adds value by reinforcing that CNPJ must be 14 digits and exclusively for legal entities, and that CPF is refused. This enriches the schema's parameter descriptions. Remaining parameters are adequately covered by the schema.

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 saves fixed data of the affiliate to config/prestador.json for reuse in emissions. It specifies the verb 'Grava' and the resource 'dados fixos do afiliado'. It distinguishes from siblings by its focus on configuration before emission.

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 explicitly advises 'Use antes da primeira emissão ou para corrigir CNPJ/IM/LC116/ISS', providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the sibling tools cover different operations, making it implicit.

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