Grades/variações

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate whether the tool performs a read or write operation, what data it returns, or any side effects. The agent has zero insight into the tool's behavior.

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 extremely short, but brevity alone is not efficiency—it is under-specification. A single vague phrase provides almost no information and is not well-structured or front-loaded with actionable 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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is the only source of context. It is completely inadequate—an agent cannot discern what the tool does, what it returns, or how it relates to other product tools. Essential operational context is missing.

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, making schema coverage 100% trivially. Per guidelines, a baseline of 4 applies for 0-parameter tools. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but there are no parameters to explain, so this is acceptable.

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 'Definições de grade cadastradas' is a noun phrase without an action verb. It vaguely suggests 'registered grid definitions' but does not state whether the tool lists, retrieves, or modifies these definitions. It fails to identify a clear verb and resource, leaving the tool's core function ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many siblings (e.g., produto_get, produtos_categorias). There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or alternatives, so an agent cannot determine appropriate usage.

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