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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool covers a 'quadro geral de inabilitados' keyed by CPF/CNPJ, which is modest context but does not contradict annotations. No return format, pagination, or other behavioral details are disclosed.

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, compact phrase with no filler or redundant words. It is front-loaded with the most important information (Banco Central and the list type) and is appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool.

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 simple read-only tool with strong annotations, this is minimally serviceable. However, clear gaps remain: the 'completo' parameter is undefined, there is no output format description, and no distinction from similar compliance_bacen_proibidos is provided. The description is adequate but not rich.

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?

The schema provides zero descriptions for its two parameters, so the description must compensate. It partially does by indicating 'por CPF/CNPJ', clarifying that the CPF parameter accepts CNPJ as well, but it leaves the 'completo' boolean parameter completely 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 identifies the resource ('quadro geral de inabilitados' — general list of disqualified persons) and scope ('por CPF/CNPJ'), making the tool's function reasonably clear. However, it is a noun phrase rather than an explicit action statement, and it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool compliance_bacen_proibidos.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling compliance_* tools, nor does it state any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools. It simply names the resource without contextualizing its appropriate use.

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