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

Annotations provide only readOnlyHint and destructiveHint as false. The description mentions bulk support via recipient_ids, but does not disclose idempotency, error behavior, or required permissions. More context is needed.

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 verbose and includes multiple actions that are not relevant to the flattened action. It could be streamlined to focus on create_withdrawal. The bulk support mention is useful but could be stated more concisely.

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?

Given the complexity (multi-action tool with 4 parameters, no output schema), the description lacks details on return values, error states, and sample usage. The batch feature is mentioned but overall completeness is low.

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 some meaning: it states that 'recipient_id' and 'data' (with amount) are required for create_withdrawal. However, 'account' parameter is unexplained, and 'data' type is string but content format (JSON?) is not clarified.

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 (create, update, etc.) but the flattened action is 'create_withdrawal'. The purpose is somewhat clear but cluttered with irrelevant actions, which may confuse an AI agent about the primary function.

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_recipients_write_create etc. The description does not differentiate or provide selection criteria.

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