ipca_periodo

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the data source and output, but does not disclose error handling, date validation behavior, rate limits, or data freshness. Adds some context beyond schema but lacks depth on behavioral traits.

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?

Description is extremely concise: two sentences in Portuguese front-loading the purpose, source, and use case. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and usage context. It could mention edge cases like handling future dates or large date ranges, but for a simple query tool it is complete enough.

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% with both parameters described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema descriptions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it queries the IPCA (BCB/SGS series 433) and returns monthly percent change. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ptax_data and taxa_selic by specifying the specific inflation index and its use for monetary correction.

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?

Explicitly states it is useful for inflation calculations and monetary correction, providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or list alternatives among siblings like calcular_correcao_monetaria.

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