Editar personagem do Flow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds real value by disclosing that regenerating the body image overwrites the current one but the previous version is preserved in the Flow page history. It omits permission/auth requirements and whether partial updates are allowed, keeping it below 5.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the primary capability front-loaded and the caveat about body regeneration following immediately. Every clause carries information.

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 6-param mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the main behaviors and the risky one (body regeneration) adequately. It could still clarify the return value (e.g., whether an image URL comes back) and the rename interaction, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 67%, with the key parameters (voz, nome, corpo, projeto) already self-documented. The description adds the non-obvious overwrite semantics of 'corpo' but says nothing about novo_nome or personalidade beyond naming them, leaving two undocumented schema params untouched.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Muda nome, personalidade ou voz de um personagem') plus the secondary capability of generating a full-body image, which an agent can distinguish from flow_personagem_criar / flow_personagens by name alone. It does not explicitly say 'use X to create instead', so it stops short of 5.

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?

It gives one useful conditional rule — that passing 'corpo' regenerates an existing body image — but never states when to pick this tool over flow_personagem_criar, flow_editar_imagem, or flow_gerar_imagem. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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