Buscar agendamentos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and completeness. The description adds that it returns appointments in a period, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits (e.g., error handling, performance, or what happens with invalid dates). It does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that cover purpose, optional filtering, and a cross-reference. 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?

Despite the annotations covering read-only and open-world aspects, the description omits any information about the return value format (e.g., fields, structure). Since there is no output schema, the agent is left guessing what the response looks like. Additionally, it does not mention date range limits or error scenarios.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by telling the agent that the nm_unidade parameter can be filled using personaleasy_get_unidades, providing a cross-reference beyond the schema's inline description. This helps the agent understand where to obtain valid values.

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 it returns appointments within a specified date period, with optional filtering by unit. The verb 'retorna' and resource 'agendamentos' are explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like personaleasy_get_kpi_producao (KPIs) and personaleasy_get_prestador_por_cpf (provider lookup) by focusing on schedule data.

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 provides a helpful cross-reference to personaleasy_get_unidades for discovering valid unit names, but it does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use personaleasy_get_prestador_por_cpf instead). No 'when not to use' or context for choosing among siblings.

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