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

The description reinforces the annotation's destructiveHint with 'Operação destrutiva, confirme antes' and adds valuable behavioral detail about bulk execution ('Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution'). This goes beyond what annotations provide, earning a high score.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences that front-load the primary action and follow with critical warnings and bulk capability. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, three parameters, and no output schema, the description lacks crucial context such as parameter descriptions, error handling, return value, and irreversibility warnings beyond the basic 'confirme antes'. This gap impacts an AI agent's ability to invoke correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but only briefly mentions 'id' and 'ids' without explaining their format, constraints, or the 'account' parameter (which is completely undocumented). This leaves the AI agent without needed meaning.

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 the action ('Remove um contrato por id') specifying the verb and resource. The mention of bulk support with ids gives additional detail. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'contaazul_terminate_contract', which may involve a different operation, preventing a top score.

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 like 'contaazul_terminate_contract' or other write operations. The warning 'confirme antes' indicates caution but does not specify context or prerequisites.

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