Ler arquivo de configuração

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context the annotations cannot express: the files are ISO-8859-1 encoded, which matters for decoding the result. It does not say whether missing files error or return empty, but the addition is real.

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?

Two short sentences, no padding, and the encoding note is placed last where it belongs. Efficient, though the filename list duplicates the enum and arguably consumes space the description could have spent on usage guidance.

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 single-enum read tool with no output schema, an agent knows what to pass and roughly what comes back via 'Conteúdo de um arquivo'. It never states the return shape (raw text vs structured) or error behavior for an invalid/missing file, which is the remaining gap.

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% and the single parameter is a closed enum, so the schema fully documents the input. The description's file list largely repeats the enum values rather than adding format or selection guidance, so 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?

The title plus description make clear this retrieves the contents of a PJe-Calc configuration file, and the enumeration of specific filenames (server.xml, context.xml, catalina.properties, etc.) pins the scope. It is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource statement, but the resource is unmistakable. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like config_portas or config_memoria, which also touch configuration.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool rather than the many sibling config_* tools (config_portas, config_memoria, config_token, config_datasource), nor any prerequisite or exclusion. Usage must be inferred purely from the tool name and the file list.

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