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

The description adds only the company scope ('da empresa'), while the safety profile is already covered by annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). It does not disclose pagination behavior, result shape, or any auth implications, but this is acceptable for a simple read-only list.

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?

One clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short for a straightforward list operation, though it could have included parameter context without becoming verbose.

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, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, a one-sentence description is incomplete. It lacks pagination/filter semantics and return-value expectations, which are necessary 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 description provides no information about the three parameters (page, query, page_size) and schema description coverage is 0%. Since the description does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation, agents have no guidance on how to pass filters or pagination.

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 states a specific action ('Lista') on a specific resource ('os tokens de API da empresa'), clearly identifying what the tool does. The plural 'tokens' distinguishes it from the sibling easyjur_get_token, which retrieves a single token.

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 usage guidance is provided. It does not mention when to choose this list tool over easyjur_get_token, nor does it explain when pagination/filtering parameters should be used.

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