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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context: no credentials needed, pay-per-query, accesses public data, and LGPD compliance responsibilities. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, access/payment, and privacy/legal context. No redundancy, though the LGPD sentence is somewhat verbose. Overall efficient.

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?

Covers access, payment, and data classification, but lacks explanation of the 'completo' parameter and the CPF/CNPJ requirement discrepancy. No output schema, so a brief note on response contents would improve completeness. Moderate coverage overall.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It mentions CPF/CNPJ but implies either/or while schema requires both, creating ambiguity. The 'completo' parameter is not explained, leaving a significant semantic gap.

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 tool's function: 'Consulta infrações trabalhistas registradas pelo Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego' with specific verb (consulta) and resource. It also specifies inputs (CPF/CNPJ), distinguishing it from generic sibling 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?

The description provides clear context: hosted on platform, no credentials required, paid via prepaid credit, and focuses on public data. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but sibling tools are unrelated, so this is acceptable.

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