tomticket_get_chat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly states 'Nao altera dados' (does not alter data), which is a meaningful read-only guarantee for the agent. It does not describe return values or error behavior, but for a simple fetch operation this is a solid transparency disclosure.

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 consists of two short, purposeful sentences: the main action comes first, followed by a useful safety qualifier. Every word earns its place, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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 and the description covers the core purpose and non-mutating behavior, but with no output schema, the agent gets no information about the return shape or failure behavior. The lack of any usage guidance also leaves some context incomplete, though the simplicity of the tool mitigates the gap.

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 has one required parameter, chat_id, with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention chat_id at all, nor explain how to obtain or use it. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value beyond what the schema already exposes.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Consulta' (query/get), and a specific resource, 'um chat' (a chat), and the word 'individualmente' signals single-record retrieval, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like tomticket_list_chats. This gives an agent a clear picture of what the tool does and how it differs from list operations.

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 a single chat needs to be retrieved, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as tomticket_list_chats or tomticket_get_ticket. No when-not-to-use guidance or prerequisites are provided, leaving the usage context to inference.

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