compras_orgao_consultar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields and cache behavior (24h), which adds value beyond the schema. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, idempotent, or any error conditions, leaving some gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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: one sentence for purpose, a brief list of returned fields, and a cache note. Every sentence is earned, no wasted words, and it is front-loaded with the most important information.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, return fields, and cache duration. It does not discuss error handling or prerequisites, but for a simple query tool this is largely sufficient.

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% and the parameter 'codigo_orgao' already has a description. The tool description adds 'pelo código' (by code) which reinforces the same meaning, but does not add new semantic value beyond what the schema provides. 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 uses a specific verb 'Consulta' (queries) and identifies the resource as 'órgão específico pelo código' (specific organ by code), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'compras_orgao_listar' which lists all organs.

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 states 'Cache 24h' and implies usage when a specific organ code is known, but does not explicitly exclude other tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The context is clear for the primary use case, but lacks explicit alternatives.

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