zabbix_previsualizar_alteracao

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. "Pré-visualizar" and "antes da aplicação" do communicate that nothing is applied, which is the key behavioral fact. But it says nothing about required permissions, whether the preview touches live Zabbix state, or whether the impact scope is limited to a single object.

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 sentence with no filler, but it is under-specified rather than concise, and it opens with a stray list artifact ("98.") that adds noise before the actual 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?

Three required parameters at 0% schema coverage, a nested open-ended object, and zero annotations — this is the case where the description must do the most work, and it does the least. The output schema excuses it from explaining return values, but nothing else about invocation is covered.

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% and three parameters are required, including a free-form nested `parametros` object. The description mentions neither `objeto_tipo`, `acao`, nor what keys `parametros` accepts, so an agent has no basis for filling any of them beyond guessing.

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 verb "Mostrar" plus "alterações propostas e impactos esperados" conveys a dry-run preview, but the description never says what is being previewed or that the target is selected via objeto_tipo. An agent cannot distinguish it from zabbix_previsualizar_cadastro (the sibling preview tool) without opening the schema.

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?

"Antes da aplicação" implies the intended moment of use (prior to a mutation), which is real guidance. However, no alternative is named — not zabbix_previsualizar_cadastro, not the actual mutation tools — and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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