Relatório do cálculo liquidado

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

Annotations already cover safety and idempotency, and the description adds important behavior: default full report, HTML returning text plus extracted totals, and PDF writing a file. It does not discuss error cases or what happens if the calculation is not liquidated, but the main side effect is disclosed.

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 front-loaded with purpose and default behavior, then lists report sections and standalone types. It is dense and long, but most of the length is useful domain detail rather than 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?

For a report-generation tool with no output schema, it sufficiently explains defaults, output formats, file-writing behavior, and available report types. Minor gaps remain around the exact returned total structure and failure modes, but an agent can invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents the parameters, but the description adds meaningful detail by explaining the default COMPLETO value and enumerating the available standalone report types beyond the schema's generic string array. It does not add much about max_caracteres or arquivo_pdf beyond what the schema already says.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: generate the PJe-Calc report for an already-liquidated calculation. The 'já liquidado' constraint distinguishes it from calculation-mutation and liquidation siblings, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

It clearly explains the default COMPLETO behavior, the standalone report types, and when HTML versus PDF is appropriate. It does not explicitly exclude sibling tools such as calculo_ler_pjc or calculo_exportar_pjc, so usage routing is clear but not exhaustive.

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