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

The description does not contradict the annotations, but annotations are sparse. It adds only that the customers module must be active and that batched ids are supported. It does not disclose update semantics such as partial vs. full replacement, permissions, side effects, or response behavior, which is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 compact and front-loaded with the resource name, but it wastes a line by listing all actions ('list | get | create | update') and then repeating the relevant one as '[Flattened action: update]'. It is readable but slightly redundant.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description should cover the update workflow, parameter roles, and expected results. It only adds a module requirement and bulk ids note, leaving the tool under-specified for reliable selection and correct invocation.

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% and there are 10 parameters with no required fields. The description only adds meaning for 'ids' through the bulk-support note; the roles of 'data', 'query', 'filter', 'with', 'page', 'limit', 'order', and 'account' are left completely unexplained, making invocation risky.

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 identifies the resource ('Clientes') and includes 'update' in the action list, with '[Flattened action: update]' clarifying the intended operation. However, it does not explicitly state what updating a customer does, and the generic 'action: list | get | create | update' line muddies the tool's specific purpose relative to sibling create/get/list 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?

It provides a prerequisite ('Requer o módulo de clientes ativo na conta') and notes bulk support via ids, but it gives no guidance on when to use update versus create/get/list, no exclusions, and no mention of required inputs for an update. The context is minimal and lacks actionable usage direction.

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