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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds value by listing the specific metrics returned, but does not disclose additional behavioral context such as default company scope, date ranges, or return format. This is minimal but non-empty additional context beyond 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that lists the metrics in a readable, comma-separated format. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy; it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately communicates the returned metric set. However, it does not clarify whether the metrics apply to the company identified by empresaId or the global office context, nor does it mention the default behavior when the parameter is omitted. This leaves a small but relevant 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 has one parameter, empresaId, with 100% description coverage ('ID da empresa'), so the schema already documents its meaning. The description does not mention the parameter or add any additional syntax or format details, keeping it at the schema-dependent baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Retorna') and resource ('métricas SaaS do escritório contábil'), then enumerates concrete metrics (MRR, ARR, churn, LTV, ticket médio, clientes ativos). This clearly distinguishes it from broader sibling tools like dashboard_executivo by focusing on a defined set of SaaS metrics.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dashboard_executivo, saude_financeira, or consultar_dre. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool suggestions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the metric list.

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