consultar_aliquotas_importacao

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full behavioral transparency responsibility. It clearly states this tool works offline by reading from a bundled SQLite database, requires no network connection, and discloses that the II rate is not provided. It does not mention any additional behaviors like error handling or performance, but the key trait is well-covered.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the core action and expands logically. It uses several sentences but each adds distinct information (purpose, when to use, important note, behavior, parameter format). Could be slightly more concise but the length is justified by the content.

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 simplicity (single parameter, offline behavior) and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral trait (offline), parameter format, and important limitations. No gaps are evident.

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 single parameter 'ncm' is described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds value by specifying that the code can be with or without punctuation, and provides examples. This clarifies formatting flexibility 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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: consulting reference rates for import tax calculation by NCM. It specifies the exact outputs (IPI rate, PIS/COFINS defaults) and distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'calcular_tributos_importacao' which is used after this consultation.

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 tells when to use: before calculating import taxes to verify IPI and defaults. Also provides a crucial when-not: the II rate is not available offline and must be obtained from an external site, with manual input to the calculation tool. This makes the usage context very clear.

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