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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the 'Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum' line is pure repetition and earns no credit. The only added behavioral content is that the response includes the guest's most recent stays, plus an unexplained scope constraint ('nesta operação').

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?

Very short and front-loaded, but roughly half the text is redundant scope/risk/effects metadata already encoded in annotations, while the genuinely useful detail (the required id) is absent.

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?

With no output schema and one undocumented required parameter, the description should at minimum clarify the id type and what 'últimas estadias' returns. It also leaves 'nesta operação' undefined and says nothing about not-found behavior.

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 0% for the single required parameter 'id', and the description never mentions it. An agent cannot tell from either source whether 'id' is the internal guest ID, an email, or an external channel identifier — this is exactly the case where the description must compensate and it does not.

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 phrase 'Cadastro de um cliente e suas últimas estadias' identifies the resource (a guest and their recent stays), which helps distinguish it from list-style siblings like search_guests. However, there is no verb — it names the data entity rather than stating 'retrieves the detailed record for one guest by id' — and it never explicitly differentiates itself from get_reservation or list_stays_report.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus search_guests (to find a guest) or create_guest/update_guest. The 'Escopo: guests:read' line implies read usage but gives no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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