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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's job is to add value beyond those. It does so by noting bulk execution support. However, it does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, or return format (since no output schema). The added context is sufficient for a read-only list operation.

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 sentences and a one-line bulk note. It front-loads the main purpose and adds essential detail without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description provides the core purpose, explains the primary parameter, and mentions batch support. Missing explanation of 'account' and return format prevent a perfect score, but the description is still informative enough for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It explains 'id' as the UUID of the parcel and introduces 'ids' for bulk execution. However, 'account' is not explained at all, leaving a gap. This partial coverage justifies a score of 3.

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 tool lists settlements of an installment, specifying the 'id' parameter as the UUID of the installment. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'contaazul_get_settlement' which retrieves a single settlement, and other list tools.

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 mentions bulk support for batched execution via 'ids', which provides a usage hint. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'contaazul_get_settlement' for a single settlement), nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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