Buscar marca por número de processo

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so safety is covered; the description adds the returned field set (número, marca, situação, titular, classe) and the routing to the detail tool. It does not restate the 6h cache behavior (that lives in the schema), but the behavioral picture is otherwise clear.

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?

Two tight paragraphs: the first front-loads what/when, the second the return shape and the follow-up tool. No filler sentences.

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?

Though there is no output schema, the description enumerates the returned fields and points to inpi_get_process_detail for full detail, which is exactly what an agent needs to act and chain calls.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by emphasizing that exactly one number type should be supplied — exclusivity that the flat schema does not express.

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?

States a specific verb (Busca) and resource (marca no pePI/INPI) plus the exact key types accepted (processo, GRU, protocolo, Madri). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling search tools by being the number-based lookup.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('quando você já sabe o número', 'a forma mais direta') and names the alternative for the follow-up need: inpi_get_process_detail with the returned CodPedido. It also warns to use exactly one of the number types.

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