analisar_sped

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose side effects. It states the tool analyzes and extracts information, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly mention that it does not modify any data or persist state. No contradictions exist, but the transparency is incomplete.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and then lists the extracted information. It is concise, free of fluff, and easy to parse quickly.

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 description mentions the types of information extracted (period, company, record types, errors) but does not specify the output format or structure. While this may be acceptable given the absence of an explicit output schema, it leaves some ambiguity about the exact return payload an agent should expect.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (conteudo and nome_arquivo) described in the input schema. The tool description repeats the schema wording without adding further meaning (e.g., constraints, formats, or examples), so it adds no value beyond 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 clearly states the tool analyzes SPED files and extracts specific information (period, company, record types, errors). The verb 'Analisa' is specific, and the scope is well-defined, distinguishing it from related tools like listar_registros_sped or summarize_sped.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as summarize_sped or listar_registros_sped. It only describes what it does, leaving the user to infer the appropriate context.

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