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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose that results include progress information. However, it says nothing about ordering, pagination, result size, or whether the list is scoped by permissions/workspace membership.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is arguably too terse rather than too long, but every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and hints at returned content, but leaves the shape of the response, ordering, and volume unclear — details an agent would want before deciding to call it.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies.

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 and resource (list diligences) plus scope (workspace) and a distinguishing attribute ('com progresso'), which separates it from get_diligence's single-item fetch. It stops short of saying what a 'diligence' record contains, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus get_diligence or the related list_requests/list_templates tools. The agent must infer that this is the browse-all entry point and get_diligence the detail fetch.

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