calcular_correcao_monetaria

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it fetches historical series from BCB and applies accumulated factor, but does not mention failure modes, performance, or data availability issues. Adequate but not thorough.

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 concise sentences: first states the action and indices, second provides use cases. No redundant wording, efficiently front-loaded.

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?

Given presence of output schema, explanation of return values is not needed. The description covers purpose, method, and use cases. Could mention potential data gaps or error handling, but overall complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description reinforces the meaning (e.g., 'valor original' in reais) but does not add new semantic detail beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it calculates monetary correction using IPCA or Selic with specific verbs ('calcula', 'busca', 'aplica') and identifies the resource (valor entre duas datas). It is distinct from sibling tools like ipca_periodo and taxa_selic which only return rates.

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 context ('atualizacao de dividas, contratos e obrigacoes fiscais') but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with similar tools (e.g., for just rates use ipca_periodo or taxa_selic). The usage is implied but not differentiated.

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