criar_subtarefa

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses two non-obvious behaviors: the tool is disabled for Prefeitura/external projects and, when offline, it stores the operation in a local queue. It does not detail return values or error behavior, but it offers meaningful transparency beyond the schema.

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 two compact sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed only by high-value behavioral constraints. There is no redundant or filler 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?

Given the full schema coverage, the description provides enough context to select and invoke the tool: purpose, project exclusion, and offline queuing behavior. The main gap is the lack of detail about return output, errors, or queue synchronization semantics, but those are not required for a basic correct invocation.

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 100% description coverage for its 6 parameters. The prose adds no significant parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; the offline/client_id behavior is already present in the demanda_id schema description.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: "Cria uma subtarefa técnica vinculada a uma demanda existente." This clearly distinguishes it from criar_demanda and from atualizar_subtarefa, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides a clear when-not-to-use context: "Desativado para projetos da Prefeitura/externos." It also explains the offline workflow, but it does not explicitly name an alternative sibling tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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