feegow_list_benefit_contracts

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the HTTP method (GET) implying it's read-only, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, error handling, or result format. The minimal disclosure is insufficient for a tool with 15 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose, lists filters, and includes the HTTP method. It is concise with no unnecessary words, earning high marks for efficiency.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (15 optional parameters, no output schema), the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, usage of the 'query' object parameter, or provide examples. This leaves significant gaps for the agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions filterable fields and pagination, which align with schema properties, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. Extra context like the HTTP endpoint is provided but not critical.

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: 'Lista/consulta os contratos do cartão de benefícios' (list/query benefit card contracts). It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like feegow_create_benefit_contract and feegow_update_benefit_contract by focusing on reading.

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 usage guidance by listing filterable fields and mentioning pagination: 'Filtre por documento, plano, nome, pessoa, status, unidade ou período; use page/perPage para paginação.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, leaving some ambiguity among many sibling tools.

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