olist_pedidos_pesquisa

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'Pesquisar Pedidos' and gives an endpoint. It does not mention that this is a read/search operation, any required authentication, pagination behavior, or what the response contains. This is a severe gap.

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 short and mostly to the point, but there is redundancy ('API 2.0' vs 'API V2') and it lacks structural elements like sections or usage context. It is not verbose, but it under-specifies, so a middle score is fair.

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 search tool with 16 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain the return format, how filters interact, pagination, or any example use cases. This is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity, leaving the agent with only the schema to infer behavior.

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 with descriptions for all 16 parameters. The tool description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The schema already explains each field, so no additional value is needed.

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 the tool's purpose as 'Pesquisar Pedidos' (Search Orders), which is a specific verb and resource. It also provides the exact endpoint (pedidos.pesquisa), which helps distinguish it from other order-related operations like olist_pedido_obter, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as olist_pedido_obter or other search tools. It only gives a documentation link, which is not embedded guidance, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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