resumo_semestre

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about what the summary contains (pendencies, attachments, texts), but it does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond output content, such as whether it aggregates live data or caches results.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler, listing the summary's components efficiently. Every element earns its place in a compact form.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description helpfully enumerates what the summary returns (items, pendencies, attachments, texts). However, it omits critical parameter format details and any usage context, leaving the definition only partially complete for an agent.

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 single required parameter 'semestre' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description provides no format, examples, or meaning beyond 'do semestre'. An agent cannot determine whether to pass '2024.1', '2024-1', or a name, so the description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 the resource (semester collection) and enumerates the outputs (items by topic, numbered pending issues, attachments, texts), which tells an agent what the tool produces. However, it does not differentiate this summary from siblings like listar_semestres or coletar_semestre, and it lacks a verb to clarify that it generates a summary.

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 when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no mention of alternatives such as listar_semestres or coletar_semestre. The description only lists contents, leaving the agent to infer when this summary is appropriate.

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