olist_nota_fiscal_cadastrar_codigo_rastreamento

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool updates dispatch information, but does not disclose any side effects, required nota fiscal state, whether existing tracking codes are overwritten, or what response to expect. The generic 'atualizar informações de despacho' leaves key behavioral details undefined.

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, with two sentences that front-load the action ('Atualizar informações de despacho') and provide a documentation link. However, it is slightly redundant by stating 'API 2.0' and then repeating the full endpoint name with the same 'API V2' qualifier, which could be streamlined.

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?

The tool has no annotations, no output schema, and a single nested object parameter that is only vaguely described as 'conforme layout'. The description lacks information about return values, preconditions, or operational behavior. It relies on an external documentation URL, which is not accessible to the agent at invocation time, making the description insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a description ('Dados do despacho conforme layout'), which gives only a vague reference to a layout. The tool description adds no further semantic detail about the parameter's structure or expected fields. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and the description does not meaningfully enhance it.

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 'Atualizar informações de despacho' (update shipping information), which clearly identifies the action and resource. It also provides the exact API endpoint name. However, it does not explicitly mention 'cadastrar código de rastreamento' (register tracking code) in the description, and it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'olist_cadastrar_codigo_rastreamento_pedido', which appears to serve a similar purpose for orders.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only provides the endpoint name and a documentation link, with no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or when to choose this over the similar sibling tool for registering tracking codes on orders.

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