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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the endpoint returns a unified list of appointments and tasks and supports OData filtering, but it does not disclose potential behavior like default result limits, pagination semantics, or response shape beyond the schema.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and then names the query parameters. It contains no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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?

Despite having 8 parameters, a nested query object, and no parameter descriptions, the description gives only a high-level OData hint. It does not explain how each parameter behaves, what the return value represents, or how to construct a valid query. Sibling tools and annotations help, but for an OData-heavy listing operation this is too sparse.

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 $filter, $top, $skip, $orderby, and $expand, but provides no actual semantics or syntax examples for these parameters, and ignores $select, $count, and the 'query' nested object. This is insufficient guidance for an 8-parameter tool.

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 resource and action: 'Lista Agenda unificada: compromissos e tarefas na mesma lista' (lists appointments and tasks together), and names the OData endpoint. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like legalone_list_appointments and legalone_list_tasks, which handle each type separately.

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 phrase 'compromissos e tarefas na mesma lista' clearly indicates when this should be used: when a unified view of appointments and tasks is needed. The OData filter instructions also tell the agent how to query/limit results, though it does not explicitly call out when not to use it or name alternatives.

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