Search Falazuki to find the most relevant Brazilian financial calculator for your topic, such as net salary, compound interest, or severance pay.
Encontra a calculadora financeira mais relevante no Falazuki para um determinado tema.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | Yes | Tema ou palavra-chave (ex: 'salário líquido', 'juros compostos', 'rescisão') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It says 'finds' which implies a read-only search, but it does not describe the return format, whether multiple results are possible, or whether this tool only recommends a calculator versus calculating something. This is a meaningful 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 a single focused sentence that front-loads the core action and object. There is no filler or redundant information, making it efficient for an agent to parse.
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?
The tool is simple, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description should clarify what the agent receives after calling it. It does not explain whether the output is a calculator name, a link, a list, or a confidence-ranked result. It also lacks routing guidance relative to the many sibling calculator tools.
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 schema already fully documents the only parameter 'topic' with examples and a clear description. The description merely restates that the topic is a 'tema' and adds no additional semantic value. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 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 finds the most relevant financial calculator on Falazuki for a given topic. It uses a specific verb ('Encontra') and resource ('calculadora financeira'), and it is naturally distinct from the sibling calculator tools. It could be stronger by explicitly naming what kind of result it returns.
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 purpose implies usage: when you have a topic and need to locate the right calculator, use this tool. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to avoid it or when to call a specific sibling calculator directly. The context is implied, not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.