ncm__listar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It states the tool returns a complete list with code, description, and validity data. However, it does not disclose potential limitations like performance impact of fetching all records, whether results are paginated, or any authentication/rate-limit considerations. For a read-only list tool, this is minimally adequate but incomplete.

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, no fluff, and the purpose is stated first. Every word adds value.

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 no parameters and an output schema (which can document the return format), the description explains what the tool returns in plain language. For a simple list-all tool, this is fully sufficient.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds no parameter-level detail because none exists. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description does not need to compensate for missing schema info.

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 ('Lista') and resource ('todos os códigos NCM'), clearly indicating it returns a full listing. It also mentions the return fields (código, descrição, dados de vigência). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncm__buscar (search by code) and ncm__pesquisar (search by description).

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 states it lists all NCM codes, implying use when the full set is needed. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings or mention when not to use it (e.g., if partial/ filtered results are needed, use buscar or pesquisar). The context is clear but lacks explicit alternatives.

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