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

The description discloses a POST request, implying a mutating create operation, consistent with readOnlyHint: false. However, it does not explain side effects, required authentication, idempotency, or any rate limits. The mention of 'data' containing fields is minimal and does not elaborate on behavior in edge cases.

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, succinct sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core function and includes an example-like reference to the endpoint. There is no redundancy or bloat.

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 create operation with no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits details such as expected response, error behavior, required fields within 'data', and the purpose of 'account'. The tool remains under-specified for an agent to use correctly without additional information.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the burden. It adds context for the 'data' parameter ('com os campos da tabela') but not for 'account'. The format and required structure of 'data' remain unclear, offering only marginal value beyond the schema itself.

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 indicates a price table creation operation via 'Inclui uma tabela de preço' and explicitly includes the endpoint 'POST /v1/tabelas_preco', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'mercos_list_tabelas_preco' for listing. While the verb 'Inclui' could be more specific (e.g., 'create'), the name and HTTP method remove ambiguity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools like mercos_list_tabelas_preco or any scenarios where creating a price table is appropriate, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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