simba_list_accounts_by_person

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a listing operation, which implies read-only behavior, but doesn't address authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, error conditions, or what format the output takes. The description is too minimal to provide adequate behavioral context for a tool with an 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 extremely concise - a single Portuguese sentence. While this is efficient, it may be too brief for a tool with 1 parameter and an output schema. There's no wasted language, but it might benefit from slightly more detail given the lack of annotations and schema descriptions.

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 there's an output schema (which handles return values), no annotations, and only 1 parameter with 0% schema coverage, the description is minimally complete. It identifies the tool's basic purpose but leaves significant gaps in parameter understanding, usage context, and behavioral expectations that the agent would need to operate effectively.

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 for the undocumented parameter. The description mentions 'por pessoa' which relates to the 'cpf_cnpj' parameter, but doesn't explain what CPF/CNPJ is, what format it expects, or provide any examples. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond what's implied by the parameter name.

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 'Lista contas do SIMBA por pessoa' clearly states the action (list) and resource (SIMBA accounts), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'simba_list_accounts'. It doesn't specify what 'por pessoa' means in practice or how this differs from the general list tool.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention the sibling 'simba_list_accounts' tool or explain why someone would choose this person-specific listing over the general one. There's no context about prerequisites or limitations.

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