compras_contrato_garantias

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond these annotations: client-side pagination and a 15-minute cache, which affect how results should be interpreted and paginated.

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 extremely concise: a single clear purpose sentence followed by two brief behavioral notes. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler 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?

For a simple read-only list operation with a complete input schema and an output schema present, the description provides sufficient context: endpoint, resource, pagination behavior, and caching. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema fully documents all three parameters with descriptions and defaults, so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description's mention of client-side pagination adds a slight behavioral nuance but does not substantially improve parameter understanding.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Lista', and a specific resource, 'garantias contratuais', reinforced by the exact endpoint path. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling contract-related tools that deal with empenhos, faturas, ocorrências, etc.

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 makes the tool's purpose clear — listing contractual guarantees for a given contract — so an agent can infer when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous.

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