ver_purga

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Mostra' implies a read-only operation, the description does not state side effects, permissions required, error conditions, or output format beyond the units and 'saved adjustments'. It adds minimal behavioral context.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and output details.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (purge amounts in mm³ and grams, plus saved adjustments). However, it omits whether the tool requires a selected ACE, what the output structure looks like, and any behavioral context that annotations would normally provide.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the schema already covers the empty input object.

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 states a specific verb ('Mostra') and resource ('quanto filamento cada troca de cor do ACE purga'), including units (mm³ and grams) and additional output ('os ajustes salvos'). It clearly identifies the tool's function but does not differentiate from related siblings like ver_ace or ajustar_purga.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ver_ace, ajustar_purga, or nivel_purga. Usage is only implied by the purpose statement, with no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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