Baixar histórico escolar (PDF)

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the main non-obvious behaviors: the tool writes a PDF to disk and depends on a valid ViewState. It does not describe the return value or failure behavior with an invalid/expired ViewState, but the core effects are clear.

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 short sentences with no filler: the first states the action and output format, and the second states the prerequisite and required follow-up call. Both sentences earn their 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?

For a simple zero-parameter tool, the description covers the action, the side effect, and the only prerequisite an agent must satisfy before calling. It is slightly incomplete because it does not state what is returned after saving to disk or explicitly differentiate from sigaa_get_vinculo_pdf.

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 input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameter details for the description to add. The zero-parameter baseline is 4, and the ViewState note is procedural prerequisite context rather than parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Baixa') and a specific resource ('histórico escolar do aluno em PDF'), and adds the disk-saving side effect, so an agent knows what the tool does. It implicitly differentiates from siblings like sigaa_get_vinculo_pdf by naming 'histórico escolar,' but it does not explicitly contrast the two PDF tools.

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 provides a clear prerequisite and actionable guidance: a valid ViewState is required, and the agent should call 'sigaa_main_data' first if it does not have one. It does not mention explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it stops short of a 5.

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