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

The description reveals that the tool requires a secret key ('só sk_') and supports batch execution via recipient_ids. However, it misleads by including extraneous actions and does not cover failure modes, idempotency, or detailed effects beyond 'update bank account'.

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 irrelevant information about other actions, making it confusing. It could be reduced to a single sentence focused on the flattened action without losing meaning.

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?

Despite having 4 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description lacks details on the API endpoint, the effect of each parameter, and return values. It fails to fully equip an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage, the description bears full responsibility for explaining parameters. It mentions recipient_id, data, and recipient_ids but does not describe the structure of 'data' or the role of 'account'. The meaning of parameters remains largely inferred.

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 starts by suggesting multiple actions (create, update, etc.) but later clarifies that the tool is flattened to 'update_bank_account'. This contradiction makes the tool's specific purpose unclear, and it fails to distinguish from sibling tools like pagarme_recipients_write_create or pagarme_recipients_write_update.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool over its many siblings. The description does not mention the appropriate context or exclusions, leaving an agent to guess based on the tool name.

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