CRM consultar atividades

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only query operation but provides no details about return format, pagination, error handling, or any side effects. It does not contradict annotations (since none exist), but it is far from transparent.

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 clause. While it wastes no words, it is under-specified to the point of being unhelpful. It is not structured to front-load critical information beyond the basic action and resource.

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?

For a tool accepting a flexible nested object (filtros) with no output schema or annotations, the description is far too thin. An agent would not know what shapes of filters are valid, what data is returned, or how to handle edge cases. The tool is contextually inadequate for reliable invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'filtros' parameter. It merely says 'por filtros' (by filters), which restates the parameter name without explaining acceptable filter keys, value types, or how filtering behaves. This adds minimal value over the schema.

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 states a clear verb (consulta) and resource (atividades do CRM), with a mention of filters as the mechanism. It is immediately understandable, though it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like crm_criar_atividade or other query tools beyond the resource name.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of related tools or common use cases. It only states what it does, not when to prefer it.

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