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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral distinction between the two ID prefixes (processo returns the ficha, pagina returns the page content), which is genuine information beyond the annotations, but it doesn't discuss rate limits, size, or errors.

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 compact sentence front-loads the purpose and then enumerates the two ID types. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the key routing semantics (which ID prefix yields which result). It doesn't cover edge cases like invalid IDs, but the essential call contract is complete.

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 100% and the schema already describes 'id' as an opaque value from search. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining the two prefix forms and what each returns, going beyond the generic schema note, though it doesn't add format details the schema lacks.

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?

States a specific verb (recupera) and resource (conteúdo completo de um ID), and explicitly explains the two ID forms returned by search: processo:<id> and pagina:<evidenceId>. This differentiates it from siblings like search and detalhe_processo by scoping it to fetching content for IDs already produced by search.

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?

Clearly implies usage: retrieve full content of an ID returned by search, with distinct behavior per ID prefix. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like detalhe_processo or ler_paginas, but the search-produced-ID precondition is a strong usage cue.

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