compras_detalhar_preco_servico

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the exact returned DTO fields, explicitly warns that no price field exists (with a verification date), and notes the 10-minute cache. This is substantial behavioral context that annotations do not provide.

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 key behavior and the critical no-price warning are front-loaded in the first sentence. The description is slightly repetitive about the absence of price, but every section (endpoint, DTO fields, alternative, cache) earns its place without excessive verbosity.

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 tool with an output schema and full parameter documentation, the description covers the essential context: what it returns, what it omits, which sibling to use instead, the endpoint, and caching behavior. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including defaults and formats. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists individual purchases of a CATSER service and immediately clarifies that it does NOT return price values, which is crucial given the tool name. It distinguishes itself from the sibling compras_pesquisar_preco_servico by naming exactly what that alternative returns.

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 explicitly says that for unit price of a service, use compras_pesquisar_preco_servico, which returns precoUnitario and supplier. This gives a clear when-to-use versus when-not-to-use directive, leaving no ambiguity about the primary alternative.

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