consultar_cest

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

Discloses offline behavior (reads from SQLite), warns of potential sample-only data, and provides a script to populate. No annotations, so description carries full burden; minimal gaps.

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 concise, well-structured with clear sections (purpose, when to use, behavior, format). Every sentence adds value without 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?

With an output schema assumed present, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameter format thoroughly, leaving no obvious gaps.

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 covers 100% of parameters; description adds format examples and punctuation details, but not significantly beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 consults the CEST code, gives its purpose (identify ICMS-ST products), references legal basis, and distinguishes from sibling consult tools.

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 states when to use (when issuing NF-e with ICMS-ST products). No explicit when-not-to or alternatives, but given sibling list, the context is clear enough.

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