solicitar_download_pjedocs

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the user-phrase precondition, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not disclose what side effects occur (e.g., whether it deletes or marks the prepared document). With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the destructive action remains unexplained.

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 a single sentence, which is efficient and front-loaded, but it omits critical details such as parameter meanings and workflow context. It is under-specified rather than appropriately concise, so it does not earn full marks for structure.

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?

For a tool with four required parameters, no schema descriptions, and a large sibling set, the description fails to explain the meaning of 'prepared', the required user phrase, or the tool's role in the download workflow. It is far from complete for correct invocation.

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 0% and the description mentions none of the four required parameters (numero, grau, referencia_preparo, confirmacao). The tool provides zero guidance on what these parameters mean or how to fill them, leaving the agent completely in the dark.

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 states a specific verb ('solicita') and resource ('íntegra preparada'), but the meaning of 'prepared' is unclear and it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'baixar_resultado_pjedocs' or 'baixar_documento_autos'. It is not a tautology but leaves the scope ambiguous.

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?

It gives a clear timing precondition ('somente após nova mensagem do usuário com a frase literal'), but does not mention any alternatives, when not to use it, or how it fits into the workflow among many download-related siblings. The condition is helpful but incomplete.

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