tomticket_list_organization_custom_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Nao altera dados' (does not alter data), which is a meaningful non-mutation guarantee beyond the schema. It omits return shape details, but for a zero-parameter list operation the core behavioral trait is disclosed.

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, purposeful sentences: the first states the action and resource, and the second adds a clear non-mutation clarification. There is no filler or redundant information.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is listed and that it is safe to call. It lacks explicit return-format detail, but 'Lista campos personalizados' strongly implies a list result, and the sibling names provide additional context.

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 input schema has zero properties and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters needing explanation. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds useful domain context about organization registration custom fields.

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 ('Lista') and a specific resource ('campos personalizados de cadastro de organizacao'), making its purpose clear. It is distinct from generic custom-field listings and from organization management tools in the sibling list.

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 when to use it: when organization custom fields are needed. It also states 'Nao altera dados', signalling safe read-only invocation. However, it does not mention alternatives like the generic list_custom_fields or other scoped custom-field tools, so routing guidance is only implicit.

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