olist_notas_servico_pesquisa

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only provides an endpoint and documentation link, with no information about pagination, return format, filtering semantics, or permissions. This is a significant gap for a search tool with ten optional parameters.

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 very concise, with one sentence and a documentation link. It front-loads the action, though it includes endpoint and documentation details that may be of limited value to an AI agent. Still, it is efficient with minimal waste.

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 tool has ten optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description offers only the basic action and endpoint, with no explanation of how the search works, pagination, or result structure. It is severely incomplete for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 has 100% coverage—all ten parameters include descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it earns the baseline score of 3.

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 'Pesquisar Notas de Serviço' (Search Service Notes), identifying the specific action and resource. It provides a clear verb+resource structure, but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'olist_nota_servico_consultar', which may also involve searching or consulting notes.

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 does not mention preferred use cases, exclusions, or compare with other search tools like 'olist_notas_fiscais_pesquisa' or 'olist_nota_servico_consultar'. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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