olist_pedido_lancar_contas

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'altera dados' (changes data) and repeats the schema's confirmar=true constraint. It fails to disclose side effects, whether the operation is reversible, prerequisites, or what data is affected.

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 short and front-loaded, but the opening phrase duplicates the tool name. It efficiently includes the API endpoint and a documentation link, making it reasonably concise and structured.

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?

For a mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the operation's outcome, when to invoke it, or what the response might be. The documentation URL helps but is not sufficient inline context.

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 already fully describes both parameters (id as the order ID, confirmar as a boolean constrained to true). The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating confirmar=true, so it earns the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'Lançar Contas do Pedido' and provides the endpoint, but it never explains what 'lançar contas' actually does (e.g., posting financial accounts). It is specific in naming the resource (order accounts) and action, but remains functionally vague without domain knowledge.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The only extra sentence warns that the operation alters data and requires confirmar=true, which is a constraint but not a usage directive. It does not contrast with related siblings like olist_pedido_estornar_contas or olist_nota_fiscal_lancar_contas.

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