olist_expedicao_obter_agrupamento_impressao

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what data it returns, whether it has side effects, or any prerequisites. The endpoint string and documentation link add little behavioral transparency.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The repeated endpoint information and documentation link are somewhat redundant but do not significantly bloatt the text.

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?

This is a single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what the printing grouping contains or how it is returned. It does not, leaving a significant gap for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it correctly.

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 provides full coverage for the single parameter 'idAgrupamento' with a description ('ID do agrupamento na Olist'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already contains.

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 states a specific action ('Obter agrupamento para impressão' - get grouping for printing) and names the API endpoint. It is clear about the resource and operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar expedition tools like olist_expedicao_obter_etiquetas_impressao.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only provides the endpoint and a documentation link, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the name alone.

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