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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe, non-mutating tool. The description adds context about pagination and bulk support but no further behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, authentication). 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?

The description is short but contains mixed languages and a confusing 'Actions' list that may mislead. The '[Flattened action: list]' note attempts to clarify, but the overall structure is messy. Could be more 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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description should cover more. It fails to explain the 'account' parameter, doesn’t specify output format or pagination behavior, and leaves ambiguity between list and get modes. Annotations are good but insufficient alone.

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 page, size, plan_id, and plan_ids, but does not explain all parameters (e.g., account, data). The meaning of 'data' is ambiguous (parameter vs output field). Insufficient for an agent to use parameters correctly.

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 states it deals with Pagar.me V5 subscription plans and mentions list and get actions, but it is unclear whether the tool is solely for listing or also for retrieving a single plan. The inclusion of 'get' functionality blurs purpose, especially given the existence of sibling pagarme_plans_get.

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 hints at usage by action (list vs get) and bulk support, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like pagarme_plans_get or pagarme_plans_write_create. No when-not or exclusion criteria provided.

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