Brazilian Municipalities

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

Annotations already declare read-only, safe, idempotent. Description adds specific count of returned items and data source/license (IBGE CC BY 4.0), providing useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences; the first captures the core purpose, the second adds license info. Slightly redundant license info but not detrimental. Front-loaded and 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?

Given the low complexity (2 optional params, output schema present, rich annotations), the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns and its filtering behavior. Minor omission: doesn't explicitly state that omitting filter returns all, but that's implied. Overall adequate.

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 100% with good descriptions for both parameters. The description echoes the 'by 2-letter state code' filter but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score applies.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'list' and resource 'Brazilian municipalities', specifies the count (5,570) and filtering option by state code. Distinct from sibling tools which cover other IBGE datasets.

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?

Explicitly says 'or filtered by 2-letter state code', giving clear context for filtering. Does not include explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but for a straightforward list tool this is sufficient.

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