consultar_cliente

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to state whether the tool returns a boolean existence flag, a list of matches, or full contact records, and does not explain behavior when multiple parameters are provided or none are given. The verb 'consulta' implies read-only, but the lack of return format info leaves a significant gap.

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 with no redundancy. The first sentence packs the core purpose and search method, and the second adds a direct usage directive. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should outline return values and edge cases. It does not specify the output format or behavior for missing or multiple parameters. Although the tool is low complexity, these gaps make the description only partially complete for an agent.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters (100%), so the baseline is 3. The description only reiterates the search fields without adding new semantics such as exact vs. partial matching, AND/OR behavior, or the effect of omitting all parameters. It adds negligible value 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 a specific verb ('Busca e consulta') and clearly identifies the resource ('base de contatos do sistema (Pessoas/Empresas)') and search criteria (Nome, Email, CPF/CNPJ). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools focused on tickets and knowledge. The workflow hint 'antes de abrir tickets' further clarifies its unique role.

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 explicitly instructs 'Sempre use essa função se o usuário solicitar para checar um cliente, antes de abrir tickets.' This provides a clear conditional trigger and timing for use, which is sufficient for an agent to select this tool. Since no sibling tool offers the same lookup functionality, no alternatives are needed.

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