compras_catser_consultar

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

The description mentions 'Cache de 24h' (24-hour cache), which reveals a behavioral trait not covered by any annotations (none provided). However, it does not fully disclose potential side effects, error behavior, or whether the tool requires authentication. The disclosure is helpful but incomplete for a data query 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 exceptionally concise: three short sentences covering purpose, output, usage tips, and caching. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The tool has only one parameter, high schema coverage, and provides an output schema (context signal indicates has output schema=true). The description covers purpose, usage guidance, and a 24-hour cache disclosure. It adequately explains what the tool does without needing to detail return values (output schema handles that). Minor gap: does not warn if the code might be invalid or not found, but acceptable for a simple lookup.

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 description coverage is 100%, as the single parameter 'codigo_item' is fully described in the schema (integer, 4-6 digits, example). The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond the schema example, but it does imply that the code must be known beforehand. A baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already covers the parameter well.

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 specifies the verb 'Consulta detalhes de um item CATSER pelo código' (queries details by code), identifies the exact resource (CATSER item), and lists the returned data (name, description, classification, units). It is clearly distinct from its siblings like compras_catser_listar_secoes and compras_catmat_consultar.

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 states when to use this tool: 'Use para confirmar o código antes de pesquisar preços ou contratações similares.' It implies a prerequisite (need to have the code) and suggests it's the right tool before searching prices or similar contracts. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives, but the context is clear for a lookup tool.

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