aya_template_primeiro_planejar

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and does add value by revealing that the tool avoids opening/copying all templates and instead searches candidates efficiently. It also discloses the priority order between the external template and the Agents library, which is useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the primary action and includes the key behavioral distinction without wasted words. It is concise, focused, and easy to parse.

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 explains the strategy but omits important operational details: what the tool returns, how consulta and limite affect execution, and what the agent should do with the candidates found. With no output schema and no annotations, this leaves significant gaps for correct invocation.

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%, and the description does not explain the consulta or limite parameters at all. The description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation, leaving the agent to infer what consulta means and how limite affects behavior.

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 applies a template-first strategy, prioritizing an external #Template and falling back to searching the Agents library. It is specific about the resource and action, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools by name.

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 is implied: use this when you need to plan by applying template-first logic. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over related tools like aya_templates_listar or aya_agentes_planejar_equipe, nor does it provide exclusions or alternatives.

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