compras_indicadores_consolidados

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, and the description does not contradict these. It adds useful behavioral details such as the 1-hour cache and the specific metrics returned, with no hidden side effects mentioned or implied.

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 concise and well-structured: it opens with the tool's purpose, identifies the endpoint, lists the returned metrics, and gives usage guidance. No unnecessary words or redundant restatement of schema details are present.

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 output schema exists, the description is not required to detail return values, yet it still lists the main metrics and provides cache and usage context. It is complete enough for an agent to understand when and how to invoke this tool.

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 describes the two optional parameters (pagina and tamanho_pagina) with defaults and constraints, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already carries the full parameter meaning.

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's purpose: returning consolidated operational metrics for the Dados Abertos API, including service count, request totals, success rate, latency, and download volume. It explicitly distinguishes itself from market-indicator tools by saying it is for diagnostics/observability, not public market indicators.

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 provides clear usage context: use it for diagnostics/observability and not for market indicators. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as compras_indicadores_por_periodo or compras_healthcheck, but the positive and negative guidance is enough to guide tool selection.

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