ver_carrinho

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral detail that an empty session returns an empty cart with total R$ 0,00 and that totals are calculated, without contradicting annotations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the Args/Returns structure is easy to scan. The Args section largely repeats a fully documented schema field, though the Returns section earns its place by adding empty-cart behavior.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema. The description covers purpose, return shape, and the empty-cart edge case, so nothing critical is missing.

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%, and the schema already documents session_id with an example and reuse instruction. The description only restates that it identifies the customer's cart, adding no new parameter semantics.

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, 'Exibe', and resource, 'conteúdo atual do carrinho', plus the total calculation. It is unmistakably the read-only cart-viewing sibling, distinct from add/remove/finalize tools, even without naming them.

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?

Implies use for inspecting a customer's current cart, but does not explicitly say when to choose it over siblings or state prerequisites. No exclusions or workflow guidance are given.

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