consultar_cota

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that there are two independent quotas (REST and BULK), that BULK is consumed by specific operations and exhausts first, and that balance calculation requires the SIENGE_MCP_API_PACKAGE environment variable. This exceeds baseline expectations for a simple status 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: the main purpose appears in the first sentence, followed by essential operational details (quota types, consumption patterns, configuration requirement). Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description is remarkably complete. It explains what the tool shows, when to use it, the behavior of the two quotas, and a critical prerequisite. An agent has all necessary information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 the schema is complete by definition. The description appropriately focuses on what the tool reports rather than parameter details, matching the baseline for 0-parameter tools.

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's purpose: to show consumption and balance of the Sienge API's daily quotas. It uses a specific verb ('Mostra'), identifies the resource (daily quotas), and naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like connection tests and purchase loaders.

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 instructs to 'Consulte antes de uma sequência dessas consultas' (consult before a sequence of these queries), giving a concrete use case. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but given the sibling tools are unrelated, the usage context is clear.

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