acervo-juridico

There are three overlapping search tools (search, buscar_paginas, buscar_semantico) feeding two parallel read pipelines (fetch by id vs ler_pagina by path), which invites misselection. buscar_duvidas vs duvidas_do_tema and contexto_juridico vs responder_pergunta also blur together, though the descriptions offer real guidance. A capable agent can navigate it, but the boundaries are not crisp.

Names mix predictable Portuguese verb_noun forms (buscar_paginas, ler_pagina, relatar_defeito, responder_pergunta) with bare nouns (grafo, impacto, perfil_de_jurista, contexto_juridico, mudancas_desde) and two English connector-style names (search, fetch). It remains readable in Portuguese, but the convention is not uniform.

Fifteen tools sit at the upper edge of the ideal band but are justified by the broad domain: search, reading, knowledge graph, impact analysis, social-network doubts, profiles, change feed, and defect reporting. No tool feels trivially redundant at the count level, though the search/read redundancy hints at slight over-provisioning.

The surface covers the lifecycle well: multiple search modes, reading, graph traversal, impact/cascade analysis, a change feed for indexers, social-doubt reading, and a write path (relatar_defeito) with credentials. Minor gaps remain around authoring/updating content, but the read-and-report domain is thoroughly served.