Atualizar tabelas e índices do PJe-Calc

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

Adds significant context beyond the annotations: the operation replaces regional tables of other TRTs (explaining destructiveHint), takes 10–60 s, requires internet, and falls back to the TRT8 national proxy if the TRT refuses. This tells the agent what gets overwritten and the failure path, which the annotation flags alone do not.

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 dense but front-loaded paragraph that opens with the action and then the mechanics. Every clause carries information (fallback, timing, parameter rule, requirement); punctuation is heavy but not padded.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, the parameter choice, the destructive consequence, the internet requirement, timing, and that it returns the tables' status. Complete enough to invoke safely, missing only explicit routing against sibling sync/status tools.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it tells the agent to derive the value from the CNJ process number ('...5.18.... = TRT18') and warns that selecting the wrong TRT replaces other regions' tables. This is decision-relevant guidance beyond the enum list.

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 ('Atualizar tabelas e índices') and elaborates the mechanism (downloads national and TRT tables, applies them), which distinguishes it from read-only siblings like tabelas_status and rest_tabelas_sincronizar_*. However, it never names those alternatives, so sibling differentiation is implied rather than explicit.

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?

Provides implied usage context ('Use o TRT do processo', 'Requer internet') but does not state when to use this tool versus restore/sync/status alternatives. The agent must infer the selection criteria from the surrounding tool set rather than being told.

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