Detalhar uma turma (cronograma, notícia, faltas)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It reveals that 'nome'/'info' are used for internal navigation and that the response is validated to never return another turma's data. However, it does not mention auth requirements, error behavior, or whether the operation is strictly read-only.

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 front-load the core function and then give the key constraint and guarantee. There is no filler or repetition.

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 covers the source of the input, the enrichment content, the required handling of fields, and a validation guarantee. The main gap is the absence of response structure details, but for a single-parameter enrichment tool this is largely sufficient.

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%, but the description compensates by telling the caller to send the 'turma' object back unchanged and by explaining the role of 'nome'/'info' in navigation. This is meaningful semantic guidance beyond the raw 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 uses a specific verb ('Enriquece') and names the exact resource (a turma from sigaa_main_data) plus the added data types (cronograma, notícia, total de faltas). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sigaa_main_data (listing) or sigaa_get_notas (grades).

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 anchors usage to a prior step: the 'turma' must come from sigaa_main_data, and the user is told to send it back unaltered. This gives clear context for when to call the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions.

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