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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, consistent with creation. The description introduces bulk support ('accepts order_ids, reference_ids for batched execution'), adding some behavioral context. However, it lacks details on side effects, required permissions, error behavior, and the return format.

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 structurally poor. It intermingles instructions for multiple actions (list, get, create) in a single tool description, leading to confusion. A clearer separation or focus on create alone would improve conciseness.

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, no output schema, and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the nested 'order' object structure, the purpose of each parameter, or the behavior of bulk operations. The tool is complex and requires more detailed 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the 'order' object and bulk parameters (order_ids, reference_ids) but does not explain the 'account' parameter or specify the role of each parameter. The guidance for 'order' is to consult external documentation, which is insufficient.

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 mentions multiple actions (list, get, create) but this tool is specifically for creating orders. The inclusion of list and get actions confuses the purpose, despite the title and flattened action indicating create. It does state 'create: cria um pedido', but the extraneous details harm clarity.

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 provides vague guidance for create ('passe o objeto order conforme a doc PagSeguro') and includes usage notes for other actions (list, get) that are not relevant to this tool. It does not explicitly state when to use create versus the sibling tools pagseguro_orders_list or pagseguro_orders_get.

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