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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it is a list operation with bulk support via invoice_ids, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it lacks details on pagination behavior or rate limits.

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 concise and includes bullet points for clarity, but mixes Portuguese and English, which may cause minor confusion. The structure is acceptable but could be streamlined.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not describe the return format or fields of the invoice list. For a list tool, this is a significant gap. Additionally, the bulk behavior is mentioned but not fully explained.

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 description coverage, the description adds value by explaining that 'data' contains filter fields (subscription_id, customer_id, status, due_since/until) and mentions invoice_id and invoice_ids. However, it does not explain the format of the 'data' string or the 'account' parameter.

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 is for listing invoices ('Faturas... list') and distinguishes between list and get actions, with an explicit indication that this tool is for listing ('[Flattened action: list]'). It also mentions bulk support, further clarifying its purpose.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pagarme_invoices_get or pagarme_invoices_cancel. While it mentions a 'get' action for single invoice retrieval, it does not specify usage contexts or prerequisites.

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