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

The description adds '[write, altera dados]' which aligns with the annotation readOnlyHint=false, but it does not provide additional behavioral details such as side effects, reversibility, or requirements. Since annotations already cover the write nature, the extra context is minimal and does not contradict them.

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 with the action and an HTTP reference. It wastes no words, though it could be slightly more structured with parameter hints. Overall, it is appropriately sized.

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 mutating action with two undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks details about expected inputs, what 'move' entails, or any special conditions. The description does not adequately prepare the agent for correct invocation.

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 two parameters (body and account) are not explained at all. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it only mentions the endpoint without elaborating on what body or account should contain. This is a critical gap for a tool with no default parameter info.

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: 'Mover negócios' (Move businesses) and includes the HTTP endpoint POST /api/v1/businesses/actions/move. This is specific and distinct from sibling tools like lose/restore/win, making the purpose unambiguous.

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. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and endpoint alone.

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