saude

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that no API key is required, that the tool returns counts and a timestamp, and that it is meant as a status check. It does not mention potential latency or caching behavior, but for a simple no-parameter status endpoint this is adequate.

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 concise and well structured: it states what the tool returns, why it is useful, and that it requires no parameters or key. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description sufficiently explains the return content: counts per data type and the last-ingestion timestamp. For a zero-parameter health-check tool, this is complete enough for an agent to call it and interpret the result correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4, and the description explicitly states 'Sem parâmetros', confirming that no arguments are needed. This adds clarity beyond the empty input schema and removes any doubt about invocation requirements.

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 opens with a clear subject, 'Estado atual da base do Dados B3', and then uses a concrete verb, 'Devolve', to state exactly what is returned: counts by data type and last-ingestion timestamp. This makes the tool's purpose obvious and distinguishable from data-retrieval siblings like listar_empresas or indicadores_anuais.

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 gives explicit context for when to use the tool: to know the current universe size and to verify data freshness before trusting a number. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended use case is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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