autorizar_ocr

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states that the tool authorizes OCR, but does not disclose side effects, whether it triggers OCR immediately, or what happens if limits are exceeded. Key behavioral details are missing.

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 concise with two sentences: the first states the action, the second specifies the condition. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 three required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides essential context (authorization limits and condition) but lacks details on prerequisites, what happens post-authorization, and the meaning of 'case_id'. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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. It adds meaning for 'max_pages' and 'max_calls' by linking to 'tetos explicitos', but does not explain 'case_id'. The description partially clarifies parameters but is incomplete.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: authorizing OCR BYOK execution with explicit page and call limits. It also specifies the condition when it is obligatory, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle different states or actions.

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 condition for usage: 'Obrigatorio quando status_caso indicar paused_awaiting_ocr_approval.' This tells the agent exactly when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, missing explicit exclusions.

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