atualizar_catalogo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and it does disclose the main behaviors: rescanning, schema-change detection, and relationship recalculation. However, it does not state side effects, whether the operation is destructive, whether it persists changes, or what happens when schema changes are actually detected.

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?

The description is a single sentence with three concise action clauses and no filler. It is easy to scan and every clause adds meaningful information about what the tool does.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool, the description is adequate but not complete: there is no output schema, yet the description does not say what the tool returns or confirms after running. It also omits prerequisites, failure modes, and any operational context about when a catalog refresh is appropriate.

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 input schema has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is necessary. The zero-parameter baseline applies, and the description adds no parameter context, which is acceptable here.

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 clear action on a resource: rescan the XLSX, detect schema changes, and recalculate relationships. This goes beyond the generic tool name and helps distinguish it from siblings like listar_tabelas or status_catalogo, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with inferir_relacionamentos.

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 explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the word 'Revarre' and 'detecta mudanças de schema' imply it is a refresh operation meant to be run after the XLSX source has changed. It does not name conditions, alternatives, or exclusions.

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