zabbix_consultar_host

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full disclosure burden, and "consultar" only weakly signals a read-only operation. It says nothing about required permissions, what happens when a host is not found, whether both or either identifier is needed, or how heavy the response is for a "complete details" call.

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?

It is a single short sentence with the resource front and center, but the leading "12." is an artifact of a list and adds nothing, and the brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency.

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?

The presence of an output schema covers return values, but for a detail-fetch tool with zero annotation coverage and two undocumented, mutually optional identifiers, the description leaves critical calling decisions unresolved. It also lacks any hint of the host-detail categories the result contains.

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 0% and the description mentions no parameters, yet the two parameters (nome, hostid) are both optional, creating a real either/or ambiguity the agent cannot resolve from either source. Nothing indicates whether both can be supplied, which takes precedence, or what a null pair does.

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?

"Consultar detalhes completos de um host" states a specific verb and resource with a scope hint ("completos"), so the purpose is graspable. But it never distinguishes itself from close siblings such as zabbix_consultar_disponibilidade_host, zabbix_consultar_inventario, or zabbix_listar_hosts, so the agent must guess which detail-returning host tool applies.

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?

The word "detalhes completos" faintly implies "use this for full host info rather than the listing", but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or prerequisite statement. No sibling is named as an alternative, leaving routing entirely to inference.

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