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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it provides aggregated data, but does not explain what the summary returns (e.g., grouped statuses, counts) or behavioral traits like pagination limit for summary.

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 relatively short and uses bullet points, but the inclusion of multiple actions for a tool that may only support one is structurally inefficient. Each sentence is somewhat earned but could be more focused.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description does not describe what the summary output contains (e.g., fields, aggregation type). Given the tool's focus on aggregated data, this omission leaves the agent without critical context.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description partially explains parameters for each action (e.g., 'data' for filters, 'charge_id' for get), but the conflicting action list makes it unclear which parameters apply. It compensates minimally but not sufficiently.

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 lists multiple actions (list, summary, get, get_many) but ends with '[Flattened action: summary]', creating confusion about the actual purpose. The name suggests a summary-only tool, but the description includes other actions without clarification.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like pagarme_charges_list or pagarme_charges_get. The description implies summary is for aggregates, but doesn't differentiate or provide context for choosing.

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