olist_produto_atualizar_precos

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

With no annotations provided, the description explicitly discloses that the operation mutates data ('altera dados') and requires a confirmation flag. This is essential behavioral information, though it does not mention reversibility, return values, or failure modes.

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 with the main purpose. It contains some redundancy ('API 2.0' vs 'API V2') but no wasted sentences, and the documentation link is useful.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, documentation, mutation risk, and the confirmation requirement. It does not explain how price values are supplied, but the schema and docs partially compensate.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%; the only parameter (confirmar) is already described fully in the schema. The description reinforces that confirm=true is required but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 action ('Atualizar preços') and the resource ('produto'), identifying a specific price-update operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as olist_produto_alterar (general product update) and olist_produto_atualizar_estoque (stock update).

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 useful context: it names the API V2 endpoint, includes documentation, and states the operation requires confirm=true. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative price-related tools like listas_precos, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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