cnes_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, what happens if no data is loaded, or any potential side effects. The only behavioral hint is the dependency on previously loaded data, which is insufficient for full transparency.

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, focused sentence in Portuguese that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, and it is immediately understandable.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the prerequisites by referencing loaded data. It could be more specific about what statistics are returned, but the output schema likely captures that. The description is sufficiently complete for a simple tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document in the schema or description. Per the baseline for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the tool's function as returning statistics for currently loaded data. The verb 'Retorna' (returns) and object 'estatísticas' specify the action and resource, and it is distinct from sibling search/load tools. However, the exact nature of the statistics is not elaborated, preventing a perfect score.

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 phrase 'dados atualmente carregados' implies the tool should be used after data is loaded, providing a clear precondition for use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but none are needed for a statistics tool. This gives a clear context, though not fully explicit.

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