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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the HTTP method/endpoint and disclosing bulk execution support via ids. It does not contradict 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 two short sentences, front-loads the resource and operation, and includes only relevant content. The bulk support note is compact and adds meaningful information without unnecessary detail.

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 description covers the core purpose and bulk behavior, and annotations supply the read-only/idempotent context. However, the tool has no output schema and two undocumented parameters, leaving gaps around optional filtering/account handling and return expectations. It is minimally complete for a simple GET tool but not fully self-sufficient.

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 carries the burden of explaining parameters. It clarifies that id is the resource identifier and ids enables bulk execution, but it leaves query and account completely unexplained. With four parameters, this partial coverage is insufficient for safe and correct invocation.

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 the tool as 'Transportadoras: Visualizar' with the specific endpoint GET /api/transportadoras/{id}, stating both the action (view) and resource (transportadoras). The endpoint pattern and resource name distinguish it from sibling create/update/delete/list tools, and the bulk note clarifies an additional capability.

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?

Usage is implied through the endpoint and resource name: use this tool to view a transportadora by id, or use ids for batch viewing. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over the sibling gestaoclick_transportadoras_list, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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