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

Description explains that it reads the current process and rewrites preserving other fields (only changes what you inform). It also discloses batch capability. Annotations provide no contradictory hints.

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 concise with two sentences and a bullet list, front-loading the core purpose. Slightly more structured formatting would improve readability.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the editable fields and batch behavior. It could mention the return value, but the tool is simple enough.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the meaning of 'objeto' and 'conviction_amount', and implies the role of case_ids for bulk. This adds significant value beyond the raw schema.

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 it edits fields of a single process in Astrea. It lists specific editable fields (objeto, conviction_amount) and distinguishes from sibling tools like astrea_encerrar and astrea_etiquetar.

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?

Explicitly states to edit only one process at a time, and for closing/reactivating or labeling, to use other tools. Also mentions bulk support via case_ids, providing clear usage context.

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