Selecionar a conta do Outlook a usar

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint, destructiveHint, and readOnlyHint background. The description adds the key stateful trait: the selection is session-only and changes no permanent configuration. This is valuable context beyond what annotations convey, with no contradiction.

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 tight sentences: the first states the core selection behavior and when it applies, the second clarifies the session-scoped, non-persistent nature. Every sentence adds necessary information with no filler.

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 one-parameter selector, the description covers the purpose, the triggering condition, where to get the ID, and the scope of the effect. The annotations handle safety/idempotency, and no output schema is needed for a state-selection action.

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 100%, and the schema's 'id' description already explains that it comes from outlook_listar_contas. The description merely reinforces that source without adding new parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Define') and resource ('qual conta/caixa usar') and narrows the scope to 'próximas ações desta conversa'. It clearly differentiates this selection tool from outlook_listar_contas and other Outlook action tools by explaining its role.

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 gives an explicit when-to-use condition: 'quando houver mais de uma disponível', and points to outlook_listar_contas for available accounts. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like outlook_conectar or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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