ibge_calendario

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes features and event types but doesn't disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or response format. The schema includes pagination, but the description doesn't explain 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 well-structured with sections and bullet points. It is concise but includes necessary examples. Minor redundancy in listing features twice (list and event types) but overall efficient.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return values or response structure. It covers features and parameters adequately for a simple query tool, but lacks completeness regarding output format.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing example usage, explaining the 'tipo' enum values, and clarifying event types beyond the schema. This helps an agent choose correct parameter values.

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 queries IBGE release and collection calendar, with specific verb and resource. It lists features and event types, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like ibge_indicadores or ibge_noticias.

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 clear examples and different use cases (upcoming releases, filter by product, period, type). While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, the context and sibling tool names imply this is the go-to for calendar queries.

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