compras_indicadores_consolidados

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns specific metrics, provides the endpoint, and mentions a 1-hour cache. It does not discuss authentication, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond schema parameters, but for a read-only diagnostic tool the disclosure is adequate.

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 very concise: four sentences covering purpose, endpoint, return fields, usage context, and caching. Every sentence contributes meaningfully with no redundancy or filler. The structure is logical and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 description covers return metrics, usage guidance, and cache, and the output schema exists. However, it fails to define the time period for the 'período' mentioned (e.g., is it fixed, latest, custom?). This ambiguity about the data scope is a notable gap for a tool returning consolidated metrics over a period.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters (pagina, tamanho_pagina) already well-described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantic value or context about how these parameters affect results, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 returns consolidated operational metrics (total services, requests, success rate, latency, download volumes) from the Dados Abertos API. It distinguishes itself from public market indicators by explicitly stating what it is NOT for, which helps differentiate among the many indicator-related siblings.

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 specifies the tool is for diagnosis/observability and explicitly warns against using it for public market indicators. However, it does not compare with the sibling 'compras_indicadores_por_periodo' or clarify when to choose one over the other, leaving some usage ambiguity.

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