obter_indice_investigacao

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the error behavior ('Erro se o investigation_id nao existir') and the retrieval/non-destructive nature is implied by 'Recupera'. However, it says nothing about permissions, idempotency, or caching of the index, leaving behavioral gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by the use case and the error condition. No filler or redundancy; every sentence 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-value detail is not required, and the description correctly avoids it. With a single required parameter, its provenance documented, and the error case covered, an agent has what it needs to call the tool correctly; only permission/auth context is absent.

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 0% - investigation_id has no schema-level description - so the description must compensate. It does so by stating the parameter's origin ('usando seu investigation_id', i.e. the value obtained from 'investigar_empresa') and the error if it does not exist, which is meaningful context beyond the bare string type.

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 and resource ('Recupera o indice (resumo estrutural) de uma investigacao'), and names the sibling that produced the investigation ('investigar_empresa'). The parenthetical clarifies what an 'indice' is, making the purpose unambiguous. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with the close sibling 'obter_secao_investigacao'.

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?

Gives a clear use case ('re-consultar quantos itens cada secao tem sem precisar refazer a investigacao') which implies when to call it instead of re-running 'investigar_empresa'. It also states the failure condition. It stops short of naming 'obter_secao_investigacao' as the alternative for drilling into a single section.

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