zabbix_ultimos_valores

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but says nothing about permissions, whether an empty result means the host has no items or no recent data, how many values are returned, or what happens if filtro_chave matches nothing.

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 short sentence is appropriately terse and front-loaded, but the leading '27.' ordering prefix is pure noise, and the brevity comes at the cost of missing information rather than efficient communication.

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 described. However, with zero annotation coverage, zero schema-description coverage on both parameters, and many overlapping siblings, the description is too thin for an agent to call this correctly without trial and error.

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 and does not. It never explains that hostid refers to a Zabbix host ID (not a hostname), nor what filtro_chave is — presumably an item key pattern — nor its matching syntax. Only a vague hint of item-level filtering is implied by 'itens do host'.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving the most recent values received for a host's items. It is clearly a read/lookup operation, but it does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as zabbix_consultar_historico, zabbix_consultar_tendencias, or zabbix_listar_itens, leaving ambiguity about how 'latest values' differs from those.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus zabbix_listar_itens (to discover items) or zabbix_consultar_historico (to fetch history). No prerequisites, no exclusions, and no indication of what 'latest' means (most recent poll per item, a time window, etc.).

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