compras_pncp_contratacoes_publicacao

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: the client-side application of the esfera filter, the fact that _total_registros remains unfiltered, the ~30-day maximum query window, and the 15-minute cache. This gives the agent crucial operational expectations.

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 compact and well structured: main purpose, endpoint/scope, then operational caveats. Every sentence adds useful information, and there is no filler or redundancy beyond the modalidade codes already present in the schema.

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 9-parameter schema and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential constraints an agent needs: date window, cache behavior, client-side filtering, and total-count semantics. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the client-side esfera behavior, the maximum date window, and the common modalidade codes, which supplements the schema's parameter descriptions without repeating them wholesale.

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: 'Lista contratações publicadas no PNCP no período'. It adds the endpoint and notes coverage of all federal entities, making it readily distinguishable from sibling tools focused on proposals, updates, or specific 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 intended use is clearly implied: list PNCP contract publications by date range. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over close siblings like compras_pncp_contratacoes_atualizacao or compras_contratacoes_14133_listar, and no exclusions are mentioned.

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