listar_vendas

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

With no annotations to lean on, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only says 'Lista' (lists) and mentions filtering, implying a read-only list operation, but it does not mention pagination behavior, default status, return format, or any side effects. This is inadequate for a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and key filtering capabilities. It contains no fluff or redundancy, making it appropriately concise.

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 complexity (8 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description is too sparse. It omits crucial contextual details such as pagination mechanics (offset/limit), default status 'paid', and what the returned list contains. This leaves the agent under-informed for correct invocation and output interpretation.

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 already covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value by summarizing filter types (status, date, search text), but this repeats what is already in the schema and does not explain parameter syntax or edge cases 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 clearly states it lists sales/orders and supports filtering, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'vendas_para_enviar' or 'detalhes_venda', so it loses a point for missing sibling differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only mentions filtering capabilities, leaving the agent to infer usage from sibling names. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, which is a significant gap given the multiple related tools.

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