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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, which the description aligns with but does not contradict. The description adds only the HTTP method and endpoint, offering no additional behavioral context such as pagination, authentication, or filtering.

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 short sentence that is immediately clear and front-loads the resource and verb. Every word contributes to identifying the operation.

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 output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description is too sparse to fully support an agent. It identifies the operation but fails to explain what parameters do or what the response contains, leaving important context for a list endpoint unclear.

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 defines two parameters (query, account) with zero description coverage, and the tool description does not mention or explain either parameter. With no information in the description, an agent cannot infer the purpose or format of the inputs.

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 verb (Listar/list) and resource (centros de custos/cost centers), along with the exact HTTP endpoint. This makes it distinct from the many sibling list tools for other resources.

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 by naming the specific resource, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions or contrast with similar list operations.

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