cliente_cadastrar_historico

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is idempotent, what effects it has on existing data, or any prerequisites. The minimal text offers no transparency beyond the basic action.

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?

Extremely concise (3 words) but lacks structure and essential detail. Conciseness is only positive when the description is still informative; here it is under-specified.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a complex nested parameter, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, side effects, or the nature of the history being registered, making it insufficient for correct tool selection and use.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description adds no meaning to parameters. 'codigo' and 'dados' are unexplained; the nested object 'dados' has no constraints or examples, leaving the agent unsure of expected content.

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 'Registra contato/evento' vaguely indicates registering a contact or event but does not specify the target entity (client) or differentiate from siblings like 'cliente_historico' (likely view) or 'cliente_cadastrar' (create client). The verb 'registra' is generic.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist for similar actions (e.g., 'cliente_alterar', 'agendamento_cadastrar'), but the description provides no context for selection.

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