zabbix_consultar_funcoes_usuario

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Consultar' implies a read, but nothing about permissions required (this is a privileged user-management topic), scope of returned roles, or whether it lists all roles vs. a specific user's.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with a verb, but the leading '88.' is metadata noise that adds no meaning and slightly obscures the actual purpose.

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 and the tool is parameterless, which lowers the bar considerably. However, the description does not clarify scope (all roles? per-user permissions?) or distinguish it from the neighboring user/audit query tools, leaving a small gap.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Nothing in the description conflicts with the empty schema.

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 (Consultar) and resource (funções e papéis de usuário / permissões), so the agent knows this returns role and permission data rather than users themselves. It is not explicitly contrasted with the sibling zabbix_consultar_usuarios, but the resource distinction is discernible.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus zabbix_consultar_usuarios or zabbix_consultar_auditoria, and no prerequisites or exclusions stated. The agent gets a topic but no routing logic.

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