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

The description includes '[write, altera dados]' indicating it modifies data, which is useful. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds the write nature. It does not disclose potential side effects, irreversibility, or permission requirements beyond that.

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 concise, with two sentences. It front-loads the main purpose and includes a note on bulk support. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the 'body' or 'account' parameters, nor does it clarify the relationship between 'id' and 'ids'. The bulk support note is helpful but incomplete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'ids' for bulk support but does not explain the 'id', 'body', or 'account' parameters. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to infer the purpose of each parameter.

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 tool deletes extra fields for service orders via DELETE /api/atributos_ordens_servicos/{id}. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the resource type (ordens_servicos) and the delete action, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other delete tools.

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 mentions bulk support with ids, implying when to use it for batched deletion. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use the update or create tools for the same resource.

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