compras_contratacoes_14133_resultados_por_contratacao

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool does; it does not mention pagination behavior (though schema has params), what happens if no results, auth requirements, or any side effects. For a read-only listing tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous text. Every part is necessary.

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 low complexity (3 parameters, no enums, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally complete. It states the core purpose, and the schema covers parameter details. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus similar siblings, and does not explain the '14.133' context or pagination behavior beyond what is in the schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The overall description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain relationships between parameters or provide context that the schema lacks. The schema already describes each parameter adequately.

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 lists results of a specific 14.133 contracting. The verb 'Lista' (lists) and resource 'resultados de uma contratação 14.133 específica' are specific, and the required id_contratacao parameter ties it to a single contracting. The name and description distinguish it from siblings like compras_contratacoes_14133_resultados_listar (likely a list of all results) and compras_contratacoes_14133_itens_por_contratacao (items).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as compras_contratacoes_14133_resultados_listar or compras_contratacoes_14133_itens_por_contratacao. The description implies the id_contratacao should come from listar_contratacoes_14133, but no when-not-to-use or prerequisites are stated.

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