Recomendar momento e módulos

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already covered by annotations, so the bar is low. The description usefully discloses what the tool produces (detected segment, recommended momento, modules, copy tone), which matters since no output schema exists. It adds no auth, rate-limit, or determinism context, so it earns a modest 3.

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 well-formed sentence that front-loads the input mechanism and then lists the outputs, with illustrative examples. No filler or redundancy.

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 recommendation tool with no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the input surface partially and sketches the output categories, but omits the 'segmento' parameter's role and gives no sense of the recommendation's format. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 must carry parameter meaning. It explains 'descricao' well with two concrete examples, but never addresses the 'segmento' input at all; in fact mentioning 'detecta o segmento' could be misread as an output. One of two parameters is left semantically undefined.

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 pair (detecta, recomenda) and concrete resources: the segment, the momento, business modules, and copy tone. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like listar_momentos or listar_segmentos_e_modulos, which merely enumerate rather than recommend. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so it's clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 trigger context is implied by 'A partir de uma descrição livre do negócio ou site' with example inputs, telling the agent to use it when it has free-text business input. However, there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternatives guidance and no exclusions, so the usage is only inferred.

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