taxas__listar

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 the return includes 'sigla', 'nome', 'valor' but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any limitations. For a simple list operation, this is minimally acceptable.

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: two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main verb and resource, followed by return structure. No redundant or missing information.

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 a simple list output, the description sufficiently covers purpose and return fields. It could optionally mention sorting or filtering, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the return format (sigla, nome, valor) and the scope (Brasil), which goes beyond what the input schema provides. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 tool lists Brazilian official interest rates and indices, specifying verb 'listar' and resource 'taxas de juros e índices'. Among siblings, there is a separate search tool (taxas__buscar), making the purpose distinct.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling taxas__buscar implies a search capability, but no explicit comparison or context for selection is provided.

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