aprender_apropriacao

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the persistence side effect (writing to config/aprendizado.json) and the learning behavior, but it does not clarify whether existing mappings are overwritten, how duplicates are handled, or what happens on failure.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the call trigger is given in the second sentence, earning its place.

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 seven parameters with zero schema descriptionsable, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is not complete enough on its own. An agent would still be uncertain how to populate the parameters and what the tool's exact side effects and return behavior are.

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%, so the description needed to compensate, but it only alludes to 'este fornecedor' and 'apropriação' without explaining any of the seven properties. Required fields like centro_custo_id and plano_financeiro_id are not clarified beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 concrete action ('Grava em config/aprendizado.json'), the exact resource affected, and the purpose ('sugerir automaticamente da próxima vez'). It clearly differentiates this tool from the sibling 'sugerir_apropriacao' by describing the learning side of the workflow.

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 an explicit trigger: 'Chame depois de cada título lançado com sucesso.' It provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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