aya_framework_pack_montar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully reveals that templates/examples/vendor require explicit permission because they are heavy, which signals the role of the 'permitirPesado' parameter. However, it does not clarify side effects, return behavior, or what 'carregar' means in terms of state changes.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded and the warning about heavy components directly follows, making the structure efficient and easy to scan.

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?

The description covers the core purpose and the main constraint, but lacks output format, return behavior, and usage context relative to sibling pack tools. With no output schema and no annotations, those gaps matter more than for an annotation-rich 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 coverege is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps all three important ideas: 'pack específico' suggests the id parameter, 'budget' suggests limiteChars, and 'permissão explícita' suggests permitirPesado. The mapping is semantically useful though not as precise as a schema-backed 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 clearly states the action: it loads a specific pack with a budget. It identifies the resource ('pack específico') and adds the budget concept, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like aya_framework_packs_selecionar or aya_framework_packs_listar.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sentence implies loading a pack, but it does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or relations to sibling tools that also deal with packs.

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