grafana_consultar_tempo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it: it says nothing about result limits, whether TraceQL queries require a time range, or how datasource_uid defaults. It does at least imply a read-only retrieval pattern via 'pesquisar e recuperar', which prevents a 1.

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 front-loaded sentence with the resource and lookup modes stated immediately. The only noise is the stray list numbering prefix '34.', which is a formatting artifact rather than content.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but for a query tool with zero annotation coverage the description should cover datasource selection and TraceQL/time-range expectations. Neither is present, leaving an agent to guess at invocation constraints.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It identifies that trace_id_ou_traceql accepts either an ID or a TraceQL expression, but says nothing about datasource_uid (what it is, the null default, or how the datasource is chosen), leaving half the parameters undocumented everywhere.

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 description names a specific verb pair (pesquisar e recuperar) and resource (traces distribuídos no Grafana Tempo), plus the two lookup modes (por ID ou TraceQL). It is distinguishable from the dashboard/alert siblings, though the overlap with grafana_obter_detalhes_trace is not addressed.

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 versus grafana_obter_detalhes_trace, grafana_comparar_traces, or grafana_explorar_atributos_trace, all of which operate on traces. The 'por ID ou TraceQL' clause hints at scope but does not guide selection between siblings.

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