Exportar Transações

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

Adds context beyond annotations by revealing two modes (count/inspect vs export). However, it does not elaborate on side effects, rate limits, or detailed behavior. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, so no contradiction.

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 short (one sentence) but achieves some effect. However, it lacks structure and forces the agent to infer too much. Could be expanded without becoming verbose.

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?

With 7 parameters, no schema descriptions, and a output schema present (not described), the description is severely incomplete. The agent cannot understand the tool's full functionality or parameter roles.

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?

Schema descriptions coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions count_only, ignoring date_start, date_end, account_ids, credit_card_ids, sample_limit, and include_field_summary. Inadequate for 7 parameters.

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 'Conta e inspeciona campos' hints at counting and inspecting, and the title 'Exportar Transações' clarifies export. It implies two modes via count_only. Distinguishes from sibling transaction tools (e.g., search, update) but could be more explicit.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_transactions or transaction_overview. Does not specify conditions for using count_only=true vs false.

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