consultar_fornecedor

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 the need for at least one identifier, which is not evident from the schema. However, it does not describe behaviors such as error handling, result format, or whether multiple identifiers are combined, and 'consulta' only implicitly conveys read-only.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with 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 simple query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally viable: it states the goal and a key constraint. But it lacks guidance on choosing among the three identifiers, possible error/not-found behavior, and expected return content, leaving gaps for reliable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain individual parameters beyond their self-explanatory names. It only says 'at least one identifier' without detailing precedence, formatting, or which identifier to prefer, adding little semantic value over the 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?

The description clearly states 'Consulta detalhes de um fornecedor específico' (queries details of a specific supplier), which is a specific verb+resource combination. It differentiates from siblings like listar_fornecedores (listing) and incluir/alterar_fornecedor (create/update).

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 instruction 'Informe ao menos um dos identificadores' provides clear context that at least one identifier is required, which is useful because the schema lists all parameters as optional. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or point to alternatives like listar_fornecedores for broader searches.

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