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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by noting the connection requirement (mdfe_tenant_id) and the MDF-e-specific isolation from CT-e data.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, distinction from CT-e, result id semantics, and connection requirement. No filler or repetition.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description explains purpose, result id, and connection requirement, but leaves the 'account' parameter unexplained. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about the optional parameter would make it complete.

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 one optional string parameter, 'account', but schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain this parameter at all. The mention of 'id' refers to the returned company identifier, not the input parameter, so the description fails to add any meaning to the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') and clearly identifies the resource ('empresas emitentes do ambiente de MDF-e'). It also distinguishes this from CT-e companies by explicitly noting MDF-e has its own environment and companies, which separates it from sibling tools like hivecloud_list_empresas.

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: this tool is for MDF-e companies, not CT-e companies, and requires mdfe_tenant_id in the connection. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for CT-e companies, but the exclusion is stated clearly enough.

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