Importar .PJC no PJe-Calc

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral detail beyond them: it runs post-import steps from <arquivo>.mcp.json when present, regenerates occurrences, and returns the calculation number and pendências. It does not mention failure modes or what happens on a partial import.

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 that leads with the core action and appends side effects and return value in order of importance. Dense but coherent; every clause carries operational meaning, though the sentence is long enough to benefit from light restructuring.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by naming the return payload (número do cálculo e pendências). It covers the side-effect chain and the mcp.json conditional. Missing only error/partial-failure behavior and explicit preconditions for a fairly complex multi-step import.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including defaults. The description restates the default behavior of regerar ("regera as ocorrências (padrão)") but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Importa") and resource (a .PJC file), plus the destination context (PJe-Calc em execução) and the file's provenance (generated by the MCP or exported from another PJe-Calc). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like calculo_gerar_pjc, calculo_exportar_pjc, or calculo_ler_pjc without opening their schemas.

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?

Usage context is implied by "no PJe-Calc em execução" and the described post-import workflow, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance (e.g., why choose this over calculo_ler_pjc or calculo_gerar_pjc). No exclusions or prerequisites beyond the implicit requirement that PJe-Calc be running.

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