listar_secoes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It hints at a permission scope ("permitidas") and discloses the return shape (id + path), but says nothing about access requirements, ordering, completeness of results, or whether the listing is paginated or cached.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the return shape is front-loaded before the parameter note. Grammatically terse but every clause carries information.

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 single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the return fields and the filter semantics, which is close to adequate. It still lacks any routing guidance among the many sibling listing tools, leaving a real gap.

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 coverage is 0% and the single `bloco` parameter has no schema description, so the burden falls on the prose. The description does compensate meaningfully by stating the filter is a prefix match on the path ("filtra pelo começo do caminho"), but it omits format, expected casing, and whether an empty value returns everything.

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?

States the resource (permitted sections) and what it returns (id and the "Bloco/Grupo/Section" path), which is a clear verb+resource pairing even though the listing verb is only implied. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like listar_blocos or listar_paginas, which also enumerate hierarchy items.

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 only explains what the optional `bloco` parameter does; it never says when to call this tool instead of the closely related listar_blocos/listar_paginas/buscar_paginas. An agent must infer the choice from the tool name alone.

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