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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds valuable context: requires prepaid credit, no platform credentials, data is public not secret, and client's LGPD responsibilities. These details go beyond the annotations and enhance understanding of usage constraints.

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 a compact three-sentence paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, payment model, data nature, and legal responsibility without redundancy. Every sentence contributes unique information.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and only basic safety annotations, the description should explain parameter usage and output expectations. It omits both, offering only general context about the data source and compliance, leaving significant gaps for a query tool.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must explain parameters. It fails to mention any of the five parameters (cpf, nis, data_inicio, data_fim, municipio) or their roles, leaving the agent without guidance on what each field represents.

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's purpose: querying official Brazilian Bolsa Família data from the Transparency Portal. It uses a specific verb ('consulta' meaning query) and resource, and easily distinguishes from unrelated sibling tools (authenticate, marketplace, etc.).

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 implies usage for querying public Bolsa Família information and notes it is an official, non-confidential source with payment requirements, but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool compared to alternatives, nor any exclusions.

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