inverter_lista

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

The description states it returns a new list, implying immutability, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as handling of empty arrays, error conditions, or performance implications. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but only partially addresses it.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the core functionality. It has no redundancy and maintains front-loaded structure.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, straightforward operation), the description is nearly complete. It could mention edge cases like an empty array, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for return value details.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining the effect of the 'itens' parameter: the tool returns them in reverse order. This clarifies the parameter's role beyond the schema's type definition.

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 the tool returns a new list with items in reverse order, using a specific verb ('retorna') and resource ('lista'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform unrelated operations like ping, sum, or jurisprudence queries.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The usage is implied by the simple nature of the tool, but the description lacks when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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