tomticket_list_customer_custom_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burde. It does disclose the important non-mutating trait via 'Nao altera dados', which is genuinely useful. However, it does not mention permissions, pagination, limits, or what exactly is returned, though these are less critical for a parameterless list 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?

Two short, direct sentences in Portuguese: the first states exactly what the tool lists, and the second adds the safety-relevant note that data is not changed. Every word earns its place and no redundant detail is present.

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 low-omplexity, parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it gives purpose and the read-only safety trait. A brief note about the shape of the returned custom fields or when to prefer this over ticket/organization/department field lists would make it fully complete, but the current text is sufficient for basic invocation.

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 has no properties, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description correctly focuses on scope instead, earning the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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 states a clear verb ('Lista') and resource ('campos personalizados de cadastro de cliente'), making it obvious which list is returned. The mention of 'cliente' distinguishes it from sibling tools like tomticket_list_ticket_custom_fields and tomticket_list_organization_custom_fields.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling listing tools, nor any exclusions or alternatives. The scope is implied by 'de cadastro de cliente', but an agent is not told how to route between customer fields, ticket fields, organization fields, or department fields.

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