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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not destructive; the description adds useful context that this is an RGPD accountability record and that it returns tenant_id. It does not cover edge cases such as idempotency or failure behavior, but it adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted text. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the sequencing instruction for subsequent calls.

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 tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the key missing context: the RGPD purpose, returned tenant_id, and header usage on later calls. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears absent.

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 100%, and the schema already explains that link_id comes from gestoria_listar_mandantes and is not the tenant_id. The description reinforces the return of tenant_id but does not add further parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: recording that a gestoría opens an accepted client and returning its tenant_id. It distinguishes the operation from listing clients by pointing to gestoria_listar_mandantes as the source of link_id and clarifying that link_id is not tenant_id.

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?

It explicitly says when to call it: before reading a client's data, with X-Contix-Tenant used on subsequent calls. The prerequisite source for the required ID, gestoria_listar_mandantes, is also named in the schema.

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