dxf_query

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: pagination via offset/limit with a max of 500, wildcard support in layer/block, and that omitting layout targets the model space.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then clearly labeled QUANDO USAR, Parâmetros and Exemplo sections. The worked example collapses several parameter semantics into one line, so every element earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. With parameters, filters, pagination and safety all addressed, the definition is largely complete; only the sibling disambiguation from query_entities is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it largely succeeds: it enumerates all seven parameters with meaning, gives concrete type values (LINE, CIRCLE, INSERT...), notes wildcards on layer/block, and explains layout omission. The limit default (50) is not stated, only the max.

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 (lista) and resource (entidades de um DXF) plus scope (filtros e paginação, curingas). Clear what it does, but it does not distinguish itself from the similar sibling query_entities, so an agent must infer the split.

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?

An explicit 'QUANDO USAR' section tells the agent the intended context (inspect or count DXF entities without AutoCAD) and the pagination approach. It gives positive context but names no alternatives or exclusions, so the overlap with query_entities/dxf_sql_query is unresolved.

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