Situação das tabelas de índices do PJe-Calc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description still adds real value by describing what is returned (most recent competence/date per index) and the 2-month-lag coverage semantics of the data_liquidacao check.

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 dense sentences with the action front-loaded; the long index enumeration is justified because it defines the tool's scope, though it slightly inflates length.

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-parameter read-only status tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, return content, and usage timing. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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% and documents the format/default, so the baseline would be 3. The description goes beyond it by explaining the parameter's effect: it determines whether the tables actually cover the given liquidation date, which the schema alone does not convey.

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 ('Lê') and resource (the index tables inside the running PJe-Calc), and enumerates exactly which indices are covered. The phrase 'no PJe-Calc em execução' implicitly separates it from the REST/sync variants (rest_tabelas_*, db_tabelas), 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?

'Use antes de liquidar cálculos recentes' gives a concrete when-to-use condition tied to a sibling workflow (calculo_liquidar). It doesn't name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it falls short of the top band.

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