zabbix_previsualizar_cadastro

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does deliver the single most important behavioral fact — it makes no changes — which is genuinely useful for a preview tool. It says nothing about permissions, side effects, or why the preview might differ from a later registration, leaving gaps for an unannotated tool.

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 no filler. The only noise is the leftover '8.' list numbering, which adds nothing and slightly suggests an incomplete copy-paste.

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 need not be explained, but that is the only thing covered elsewhere. With no annotations and an undocumented free-form nested object as the required argument, the description leaves the agent without enough to construct a correct call or understand the preview's guarantees.

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% across three parameters, and the required 'dispositivo' is a free-form nested object with additionalProperties:true whose accepted fields are documented nowhere. The description only restates that proposed parameters are shown; it never explains what belongs in 'dispositivo', how 'templates' interacts, or the purpose of 'grupo_destino' defaulting to 'Discovered hosts'.

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 and resource: presenting the proposed parameters for registering a device without applying changes (a dry-run preview). An agent can tell it produces a preview rather than a registration. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like zabbix_previsualizar_alteracao or zabbix_cadastrar_dispositivos_em_lote, and the stray '8.' prefix signals it was lifted from a numbered workflow list.

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?

'sem efetuar alterações' implies this is the safe step before real registration, so usage is implied rather than stated. No alternative tool is named and no prerequisite or ordering is spelled out, even though siblings like zabbix_criar_host and zabbix_cadastrar_dispositivos_em_lote are obvious follow-ups.

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