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

Annotations already mark it as read-only and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the response is Markdown with absolute links, includes related posts, and is described as free and complete. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 first sentence is dense and front-loaded with the core behavior and output format. The second sentence ('O blog é gratuito e sai completo') adds behavioral context but is slightly vague; overall the description is compact with minimal waste.

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 simple read-only tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential call semantics: what to pass, what comes back, and extra content (related posts). It is missing only minor clarifications like missing-slug behavior or how related posts are ordered.

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 50%: lone locale has a description, while slug does not. The description does clarify that slug is the lookup key, but it does not add any information about locale beyond the schema, and the slug parameter still lacks a formal 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 uses a specific verb ('Devolve'), a clear resource ('post do blog'), and the key selector ('pelo slug'), and adds output details (Markdown, absolute links, related posts). This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like list_articles and search_library.

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: if an agent needs a full blog post by slug, this is the tool. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_articles or get_glossary, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative conditions.

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