telematica_get_record

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it retrieves a detailed record, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detalhado' (detailed) entails. The description is minimal and lacks crucial operational context.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 has an output schema (which handles return values), the description's minimalism is somewhat acceptable. However, with no annotations and incomplete parameter guidance, it leaves gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and usage context. It's adequate but not fully complete for effective agent use.

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 description mentions 'por UUID' (by UUID), which adds meaning to the 'registro_id' parameter, indicating it should be a UUID. However, with 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this provides some value but doesn't fully compensate for the lack of schema details (e.g., UUID format). The baseline for 0 parameters would be 4, but here there is 1 parameter with partial clarification.

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 the action ('Busca' - searches/retrieves) and the resource ('um registro detalhado da Telematica' - a detailed Telematica record), specifying it's done by UUID. It's specific enough to understand the core function, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'telematica_list_records'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'telematica_list_records' for listing multiple records or other Telematica analytics tools, nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage.

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