Detalhar um momento

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds substantial behavioral content by enumerating the returned payload (stills, films with pre-filled English prompts, linked instruments, interactions, sound, background action, suggested chapters, tips). With no output schema, this enumeration is the only source of return-value information and it earns real credit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first, followed by a dense but purposeful enumeration. Every listed item adds information; no filler.

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 nested objects, six parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned and the read-only nature. It falls short on usage context and on clarifying the input parameters that customize the prompts, so it is viable but incomplete.

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 description never addresses parameters, though six exist. Schema coverage is 67%, leaving marca and idioma undocumented anywhere, and the description does not compensate. Only 'assunto' is faintly echoed via 'já preenchidos com o seu assunto'.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Mostra tudo de um momento') and enumerates the returned content (stills, films, instruments, interactions, sound, background, chapters, tips), so an agent knows exactly what this retrieves. It does not, however, differentiate itself from sibling detail/analysis tools like capturar_capitulo or analisar_site.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not say when to call this versus listar_momentos (only referenced in the schema) or any other sibling.

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