Imagens do produto

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions base64 format, which is useful, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no images exist, whether multiple images are returned, or the response structure. This is a significant gap, especially with no output schema.

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, consisting of a short noun phrase. It is front-loaded with key information (product images, base64, by code) and contains no fluff. However, it is not a complete sentence, which slightly reduces readability, but for its length it is efficient.

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 the description leaves out important context. With no output schema, an agent cannot anticipate the response shape (e.g., JSON object, array of base64 strings, or single string). It also omits error behavior, such as handling non-existent product codes. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, this description is insufficient for confident tool 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?

The schema defines a single required parameter 'cod' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only says 'por Cod', which essentially restates the parameter name. It does not explain the expected format, constraints, or how the code should be supplied, adding almost no value beyond the schema's structural definition.

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 'Imagens base64 do produto (por Cod)' clearly states that the tool provides product images in base64 format keyed by product code. Although it lacks an explicit verb, the meaning is unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like produto_get or produtos_categorias by focusing on images. It doesn't name a sibling explicitly, but the purpose is clear.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only hint is 'por Cod', implying a product code is needed, but no exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned. The description does not explicitly explain when to prefer this tool over other product-related tools, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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