compras_pncp_contrato_por_orgao

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states it is a query (not a mutation) and notes the 15-minute cache, which helps agents understand latency and data freshness. No contradictions or destructive hints are 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 two sentences long, covering purpose, endpoint, and cache policy without fluff. It is front-loaded but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose from technical details).

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 that an output schema exists and parameters are fully documented, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior. The 15-minute cache note adds important context for repeated queries. However, it could mention what happens with missing data (e.g., 404) or rate limits.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by mapping parameters to the endpoint path ('/v1/orgaos/{cnpj}/contratos/{ano}/{sequencial}'), clarifying how they relate to the API URL structure. This is useful for agents to understand the request format.

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') and resource ('contrato específico') and clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning the endpoint and cache behavior. It directly tells the agent it retrieves a single contract, not a list.

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 the endpoint path and cache duration, implying use by CNPJ, year, and sequential number. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compras_pncp_contratos_listar' or 'compras_contratos_consultar', and no exclusions are stated.

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