sei_criar_processo

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

Annotations declare this as a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation. Description adds that it returns IdProcedimento and ProtocoloFormatado, but doesn't elaborate on prerequisites (e.g., required unit context, permissions) or side effects beyond creation. Adequate but not extra.

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?

Well-structured with a header, parameter list, return note, and additional tip. Each sentence adds value, though the final note about assuntos could be integrated into the parameter list for brevity.

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 7 parameters and complex conditional logic (hipotese_legal), the description covers key aspects and references helper tools. Mentions output fields. Doesn't cover error scenarios or rate limits, but overall sufficient for a creation tool.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage; the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, default values, and how to obtain valid IDs (e.g., using sei_pesquisar_tipos_processo). The nivel_acesso parameter includes explicit mapping (0,1,2) and condition for hipotese_legal.

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 starts with 'Cria um novo processo no SEI,' a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from related tools like sei_alterar_processo (alter) and sei_enviar_processo (send).

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 detailed guidance on how to use each parameter, including references to helper tools (sei_pesquisar_tipos_processo, sei_pesquisar_hipoteses_legais) and conditional rules (hipotese_legal required for restrito/sigiloso). Missing explicit when-not-to-use, but context makes usage clear.

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