Diagnostico

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a connectivity/credential probe but never states that it is read-only and side-effect free, whether it performs live network calls (and therefore may be slow or fail), or what it does when a component is down.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the answer to 'what does this check' with zero filler or repetition of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and with zero parameters the input side is trivial. However, with no annotations and no usage guidance, an agent still lacks the context to decide when this diagnostic is the right call versus 'diagnostico_web'.

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 takes zero parameters, which normally sets a baseline of 4, but there are no parameters here for the description to illuminate, and the description adds no invocation guidance (e.g. that no inputs are needed). The score reflects that the description neither helps nor harms on this dimension.

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 names what the diagnostic inspects — 'os dois web services, o catálogo e a credencial' — which is a concrete scope beyond the bare tool name, and the scope (two web services, catalog, credential) implicitly separates it from the narrower sibling 'diagnostico_web'. The verb is only implicit ('O que está de pé'), so it stops short of the specific verb+resource phrasing that would earn a 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to run this diagnostic, no preconditions, and no mention of the sibling 'diagnostico_web' that overlaps in scope. The agent must infer that this is a general health check from the name alone.

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