carregar_compras

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explains that the tool loads purchase tools with resolved data, which provides context, but it does not explicitly state whether this is a read-only operation or if there are side effects. Since 'carregar' implies loading, it's likely harmless, but this is not made explicit.

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-loaded with the main action and content, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states what the tool does and when to call it. It lacks details about return values or prerequisites like authentication, but given the simplicity and the existence of sibling tools like verificar_autenticacao, it is sufficiently contextual.

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, and the schema coverage is 100%. According to the baseline rule, 0 parameters merit a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, which is appropriate.

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 verb 'Carrega' (loads) and the resource 'ferramentas de compras' (purchase tools), and specifies the content loaded (queue of pending approvals with resolved items, inputs, suppliers, and works). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on loading the purchasing context rather than testing connections or explaining processes.

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 says 'Chame quando a conversa for sobre pedidos de compra, aprovação ou fornecedores' (call when the conversation is about purchase orders, approval, or suppliers), providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it misses the full 5-level specificity.

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