Localizar o PJe-Calc no computador

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is partly covered. The description adds real behavior beyond that: the ordered discovery strategy (PJECALC_HOME, saved choice, running instance, parent folder, common directories) and the fact that "pasta" persists a choice while "procurar_de_novo" forgets it. No contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary purpose (which installation is in use and how it was found), followed by per-parameter behavior. The parenthetical list of search locations is long but informative; otherwise the text is tight.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by explaining what is reported (the installation in use plus the discovery method). For a two-parameter, zero-required tool this is essentially complete, with only minor gaps around failure behavior when nothing is found.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine semantics the schema lacks: "pasta" selects and persists an installation for future runs, and "procurar_de_novo" clears the saved choice. These side effects are not visible from the schema alone.

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+resource: it shows which PJe-Calc installation the MCP is currently using and how it was found. This is clearly distinct from siblings like pjecalc_status and pjecalc_info, and an agent can tell what the tool returns without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit conditions for both parameters: use "procurar_de_novo" when the folder was moved, and "pasta" to persist a user-chosen installation. It also instructs the agent to ask the user when multiple installations exist. It does not name an alternative sibling tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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