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

The description adds '[write, altera dados]' which explicitly states the write behavior, consistent with readOnlyHint=false in annotations. However, this is largely redundant with the annotation, and no additional behavioral traits (e.g., irreversibility, side effects) are disclosed. It adds minimal value beyond the annotations.

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 no wasted words. It is efficiently structured, front-loading the purpose and endpoint. However, while concise, it sacrifices necessary detail, making it minimally viable.

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?

With no parameter descriptions, no output schema, and minimal behavioral context, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what data is required to create a new record, the structure of 'atributos_cadastros', or any nuances of the request. This is inadequate for a creation tool in a large API.

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 input schema has two string parameters (body, account) with no descriptions, and schema coverage is 0%. The description does not mention either parameter, providing no guidance on what body should contain or what account refers to. This is a critical gap for a creation tool.

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 'Cadastrar' (create) and the resource 'Campos extras de cadastros' (extra fields of registrations), and provides the HTTP endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like _delete, _list, etc., and from other attribute type tools by naming the specific resource.

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 via the verb 'Cadastrar' and the context of a create operation, but it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The name and endpoint provide implicit guidance, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements.

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