sei_criar_observacao

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: the observation is unit-wide and visible to all unit users, plus a note on version availability. No contradiction with annotations. It could include permission requirements but the added context is valuable.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes a distinction from a sibling, version info, and an error recovery hint. No extraneous content, but could be slightly more structured with parameter 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?

Given the simple tool (2 required params, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, distinction, and error handling. However, the lack of parameter descriptions makes it incomplete. Annotations cover safety, so no need for that, but parameter semantics are missing.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description provides no additional meaning for the two parameters 'processo' and 'descricao' beyond their names. No format, examples, or constraints are given. This is a significant 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?

Description clearly states the verb (cria) and resource (observação da unidade em um processo). Explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tool sei_criar_anotacao by explaining the difference: observation is linked to unit and visible to all users, whereas annotation is an individual post-it.

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?

Provides clear contextual guidance on when to use this tool vs. sei_criar_anotacao. Also includes a troubleshooting hint for failed calls (check version via sei_versao). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternative tools beyond the one sibling.

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