gerar_documento_word

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it creates a Word file but doesn't mention where the file is saved, permissions required, whether it overwrites existing files, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a file creation 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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 tool that creates files with 6 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the output (e.g., file location, success indicators) or provide behavioral context needed for safe and effective use.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, resulting in the baseline score of 3 for adequate but no extra value.

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 verb 'Cria' (creates) and the resource 'arquivo Microsoft Word (.docx)', making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'gerar_documento_pdf', which likely creates PDF files instead of Word documents.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention the sibling tool 'gerar_documento_pdf' or explain scenarios where one format might be preferred over the other, leaving usage context unclear.

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