detalhar_pec

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns the 'most recent' status/tramitação rather than the full history, and that it includes ementa and keywords. However, it doesn't cover error behavior (e.g., invalid/deleted ID) or other potential side effects, which is a gap for a read tool with no annotation support.

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: two short sentences plus a one-line instruction. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value (returns data, what data, how to get the id).

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 has a single parameter, and an output schema exists (given context), so the description needn't detail return values. It covers the key context: what the tool returns and how to obtain the required id. The only minor omission is not explicitly stating when to use this versus sibling tools for detailed variant views, though the content list hints at it.

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 schema only defines 'id' as an integer with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by clarifying that the id belongs to a PEC and that it should be obtained from listar_pecs, adding practical meaning beyond the bare 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Retorna os dados completos de uma PEC pelo seu id' – returns complete data of a PEC by ID. The list of included content (ementa, keywords, latest status) differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on specific aspects like tramitações or votacoes.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite: 'Obtenha o id com listar_pecs', which tells the agent to first list PECs to obtain the id. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but provides clear context for when this endpoint should be used (after listing, to fetch the full record).

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