obter_processo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contents (header fields, timeline, documents) but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, required permissions, or error behavior for invalid IDs. For a retrieval tool, this is basic but not rich.

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 concise, with two sentences that front-load the action and list the return fields in a structured way. No unnecessary words or filler.

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?

The tool is simple (1 parameter, has an output schema), and the description provides a good overview of what is returned. It doesn't cover error handling or explicit read-only status, but the output schema likely fills in return-value details, making the description adequate though not exhaustive.

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 description adds meaning to the single parameter by explaining it is an 'id interno' and giving a concrete example (25615). With schema description coverage at 0%, this fully compensates for the lack of schema-level parameter documentation.

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 opens/retrieves a process by internal ID and returns specific header fields and the timeline of movimentos with documents. The verb 'Abre' and resource 'processo do SPA-PMT' give a specific action and scope, distinct from siblings like buscar_processo.

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 implies the tool should be used when you have the internal ID and need process header and timeline details. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks exclusions, aligning with a score of 4.

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