obter_posicao_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Recupera' implies a read-only operation and it discloses the return shape (success with data or error), but it says nothing about permissions, scoping, or whether an empty/missing carteira changes behavior.

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 core purpose sentence is front-loaded and the Args/Returns block is compact and free of filler. Nothing is padded, though the docstring-style framing adds minor overhead for a one-parameter tool.

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 an output schema and only one optional parameter, the description does not need to explain return values, and it covers the parameter adequately. The remaining gap is the absence of any disambiguation from the many near-identical sibling tools, which is the main thing an agent needs here.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter is optional with no description in the schema. The description compensates by documenting that 'carteira' accepts an ID or a name, which is meaningfully more than the bare string type in 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?

States a clear verb+resource: 'Recupera a posicao atual dos ativos na carteira.' An agent knows it returns asset positions, but nothing distinguishes it from closely-named siblings like obter_carteira_tool or obter_ativos_tool.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. With ten sibling 'obter_*' tools covering adjacent data, the agent is left to guess when this one is the right call versus obter_carteira_tool or obter_ativos_tool.

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