compras_pesquisar_preco_servico

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond those: it identifies this as a direct/raw price search rather than a consolidated statistical view, and gives the concrete endpoint. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is stated first, followed by the endpoint and the alternative for consolidated results. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With 100% parameter documentation, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description needs to carry less burden. It provides the essential routing context and endpoint. Slightly more detail about what distinguishes this from compras_detalhar_preco_servico would make it fully complete, but nothing critical is missing.

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 documents all parameters including codigo_item_catalogo with format and example. The description adds no extra parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific verb and resource: it searches practiced prices for service purchases (CATSER), which clearly distinguishes it from material price search and other siblings. It also names the endpoint and the composed alternative, so the tool's role is unambiguous.

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 tells the agent when to use a different tool instead: for a consolidated view (median, mean, deviation per IN 65/2021), use compras_pesquisar_precos_para_etp with tipo='servico'. This gives clear routing guidance beyond what the schema provides.

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