sei_anotar_processo_bloco_interno

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

Annotations already indicate it is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds version details and error-handling advice, which provides modest transparency beyond the annotations. No behavioral contradictions.

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 two short sentences without wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action. Slightly more structure (e.g., bullet points for parameters) could improve skimmability, but it is still concise.

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 existence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, for a creation tool with three undocumented required parameters, the description is incomplete in explaining the input semantics. The version and error info add some completeness.

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 must compensate, but it does not explain any of the three required parameters (id_bloco, processo, descricao). Their meaning is only implicit from the tool name, leaving a significant semantic gap.

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 creates an annotation (anotação) in a process within an internal block, which distinguishes it from general annotation tools like sei_criar_anotacao and modification tools like sei_alterar_anotacao_bloco_interno. However, it could more explicitly contrast with these siblings.

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 version information and an error-recovery hint ('use sei_versao') but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sei_criar_anotacao. Prerequisites (e.g., existence of block) are not mentioned.

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