jangada_buscar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses case-insensitivity, full-document scope, and grouping by page, which gives clear behavioral expectations for a search tool.

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 concise, using two sentences to convey purpose, behavior, and usage hint. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 search tool without output schema, the description covers core functionality well. Minor gaps: no explanation of the max_resultados parameter or example output format, but overall sufficient for an AI agent to understand usage.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), and the description does not explain the parameters beyond implying 'termo' is the search term. The optional 'max_resultados' parameter is not mentioned, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 searches a term (case-insensitive) in all PT documentation and returns matching lines grouped by page. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jangada_indice (index) and jangada_ler_doc (read doc).

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 includes a usage hint: 'Útil para achar 'como faço X'.' This provides context for when to use the tool, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with siblings.

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