preparar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Gera a entrega') without noting side effects, prerequisites (e.g., whether a profile must be loaded), or what happens to the generated output. This is a significant gap for a generation tool.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded, leaving no wasted words.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the generated delivery's format, return value, or any prerequisites for use, which are essential for an AI agent to confidently invoke the tool. The low complexity does not excuse the missing details.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly explains vagaId as the vacancy and enumerates entrega options, but it does not address the optional caminhoPerfil parameter or explain how each parameter affects the output. The description adds general context but not detailed parameter semantics.

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 function with a specific verb ('Gera'), the resource ('a entrega'), and the deliverable types (currículo, carta, formulário). It also specifies the scope ('para uma vaga com base no perfil'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like buscar_vagas or carregar_perfil.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (generating a delivery for a vacancy based on a profile) without explicitly stating alternatives or exclusions. It implicitly differentiates from siblings but lacks direct 'use this instead of X' guidance.

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