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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that results are paginated and filtered by date range, which is useful but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or data freshness.

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 concise sentence that conveys the core purpose. However, it could benefit from a more structured presentation, such as listing parameters or grouping related information.

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 absence of an output schema and the presence of 4 parameters with no schema descriptions, the description is too sparse. It does not cover return values, date format requirements, or pagination details, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool 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?

Schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only hints at date range and pagination but does not explain each parameter's meaning, format, or constraints. 'page', 'account', 'dataFim', and 'dataInicio' remain largely unexplained.

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 lists already received proceeds (dividendos/JCP pagos) within a date range and is paginated. It distinguishes from sibling 'b3_list_proventos_a_receber' which likely refers to pending proceeds.

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 implies usage for retrieving received proceeds with date filtering and pagination, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'b3_list_proventos_a_receber' or other list tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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