consultar_cronograma_transicao

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool consults percentages for listed taxes and the year range, but doesn't mention error handling, authentication, or side effects. Adequate for a simple read operation but lacks depth.

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 sentence that is clear and to the point. Every word adds value, with no unnecessary 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, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It states what is returned (percentages of each tax) and the valid year range. However, it could mention behavior for invalid years or return format.

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?

The input schema has zero description coverage for the 'ano' parameter. The description adds meaning by specifying that it is for a year in the 2026–2033 range and that it is part of the 'Reforma Tributária'. This is helpful context beyond the schema.

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 the specific verb 'Consulta' and identifies the resource as 'percentuais de cada tributo (ICMS, ISS, PIS, COFINS, IBS, CBS)'. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings (e.g., calcular_carga_tributaria_frete) by focusing on querying the transition schedule for a given year.

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 usage for a year between 2026–2033 and focuses on tax percentages, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. No guidance on prerequisites or context.

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