compilar_dossie

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses that including full text requires login, is slower, and not always available. It also mentions return dict structure. Could mention overwrite behavior, but overall transparent.

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?

Description is well-structured with summary then args, but slightly verbose. Front-loaded with purpose. Could be tightened, but still effective.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return dict (arquivo, n_itens, n_falhas, com_inteiro_teor). Covers slower behavior and login requirements. Complete for a compilation tool.

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 description fully compensates. Explains each parameter: urls (list of URLs), incluir_inteiro_teor (boolean with default and caveats), titulo (default), caminho (default). Adds meaning beyond schema.

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 compiles multiple decisions/sumulas into a single Word document, using the specific verb 'compilar' and resource 'UNICO documento Word (.docx)'. It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'buscar_jurisprudencia' and 'buscar_sumulas' as prior steps.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use depois de escolher, com buscar_jurisprudencia/buscar_sumulas, quais decisoes quer reunir', providing clear when-to-use guidance and reference to sibling tools.

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