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

The readOnlyHint annotation is consistent with the description's 'Retorna' (returns), and the description adds context about the specific metrics included. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, default period, or whether the metrics are aggregated for a specific company or all.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and lists the key metrics. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant or irrelevant detail.

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?

Given the low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema, read-only annotation), the description is adequately complete: it names the returned metrics and implies a read action. However, it could be more helpful by mentioning the intended use case or clarifying the difference from similar dashboard tools, which is a minor gap.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a description ('ID da empresa'), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add further meaning about how the parameter affects the returned metrics, such as whether it is required for filtering or what the default value (0) implies.

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 that the tool returns consolidated executive metrics and lists the specific metrics (revenue, expenses, profit, cash flow, delinquency). This uses a specific verb ('Retorna') and resource, and the content distinguishes it from other general dashboard tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dashboard_multi_pj, metricas_escritorio, or consultar_dre. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the choice of tool to the agent's inference.

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