buscar_documentos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'searches' without disclosing return format, matching behavior, side effects, or whether it is read-only. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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 a single, concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loads the action.

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 tool has a simple parameter set, an output schema exists, and the description captures the core search intent. It lacks explicit usage guidance and behavioral details, but given the low complexity and presence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by clarifying that 'consulta' is a topic or keyword ('por tópico/palavra-chave'), adding meaning beyond the generic parameter title. However, it does not provide syntax or formatting details.

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 'Busca documentos de referência do FastAPI por tópico/palavra-chave' clearly states the action (search), the resource (FastAPI reference documents), and the method (by topic/keyword). It distinguishes from sibling tools (listar_documentos for listing, obter_documento for retrieval) by focusing on search functionality.

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 implies use when a topic/keyword is available, but it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives. Sibling tool names hint at alternatives, but the description itself provides no comparative guidance.

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