ibge_sidra_metadados

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that it is 'read-only and idempotent — a live GET against the public IBGE SIDRA API. Returns Markdown.' This confirms annotations and adds output format detail, but annotations cover most behavioral traits.

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 bullet points and clear sections. Front-loaded with purpose. Concise: every sentence adds value. No redundant text.

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 tool's simplicity, annotations, full schema coverage, and an output schema (though not shown), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, when to use, behavior, output format, and examples. Complete for effective agent use.

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 meaning by listing features that correspond to parameters (e.g., 'Available periods' for incluir_periodos, 'Available territorial levels' for incluir_localidades) and providing examples with tabela values. This enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 returns metadata for a specific SIDRA table, listing specific features (general info, territorial levels, variables, classifications, periods). It uses a specific verb ('Returns metadata') and resource ('SIDRA table'), distinguishing it from siblings like ibge_sidra (queries data) and ibge_sidra_tabelas (lists tables).

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this tool to understand table structure BEFORE querying data with ibge_sidra' and 'Use this after finding a table code (ibge_sidra_tabelas) and before querying with ibge_sidra.' Clearly states when and in what sequence to use this tool versus alternatives.

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