desafio

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

The description makes the read-only nature clear ('Retorna...') and there are no warnings about side effects. However, it provides no detail about response format, limits, or failure behavior, and there are no annotations to help.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The purpose is immediately clear.

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 simple two-parameter retrieval tool, the description plus schema provide the essential calling context. It lacks examples of valid technology values and any indication of the response shape, but the tool appears low-complexity.

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 coverage is high: both parameters are documented. The description itself adds little beyond the schema; 'level' gives allowed examples ('iniciante ou avancado'), and 'technology' remains a generic name.

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 "returns a code challenge for a technology and level," with a specific verb and object. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like 'certificado', but the scope is understandable.

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?

Usage context is implied—call it when you need a code challenge for a given technology and skill level—but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer an alternative tool or avoid using it.

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