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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond this: cost per query, no platform credentials, data is not confidential, and LGPD responsibilities for the client. This helps the agent understand operational and legal implications.

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 relatively short but structured as a single dense block with run-on clauses. It mixes operational details, legal terms, and data sourcing without clear separation, making it less scannable than desired.

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?

The tool is a paid query with multiple parameters and no output schema, yet the description does not specify the return value, expected input formats, or the role of each parameter. It provides business context but lacks the technical detail needed 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 schema has 4 parameters with zero description coverage. The description does not explain perdcomp, pkcs12_cert, pkcs12_pass, or perfil_procurador_cnpj. It only mentions that no platform credentials are needed, which is tangential and leaves the agent without essential parameter meaning.

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 identifies this as a query tool for DCOMP data from official Brazilian sources. The verb 'consultar' in the name and 'consulta' in the description make the purpose explicit, and it is distinctly different from sibling tools like authenticate or marketplace.

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 clear context on when to use this tool: it requires prepaid credit, does not use platform credentials, and is a hosted official source query. It doesn't explicitly discuss alternatives, but given the sibling set, no direct alternatives exist.

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