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

The description discloses costs (prepaid credits), the non-confidential nature of the data, and legal responsibilities. It does not cover failure scenarios or rate limits, but the main side effects are addressed.

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 single paragraph with repetitive phrasing ('consulta em fonte oficial' and 'consulta informação de fontes e órgãos oficiais') and includes legal boilerplate. It could be more concise and structured for clarity.

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?

The description mentions the platform hosting and lack of platform credentials, and it references official sources and LGPD. However, it does not explicitly connect to sibling tools like authentication or payment, leaving the integration context incomplete.

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 lists three parameters (cpf, cnpj, tipo_certidao) with no descriptions. The description does not explain their roles, relationships, or which are required beyond the schema's required field. This leaves ambiguity about parameter usage.

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 function as a query for a Negative Debt Certificate (Certidão Negativa de Débitos) from the municipality of Natal, describing it as an official consultation. However, it could be more specific about the exact nature of the certificate types covered.

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 mentions payment per query and the user's data controller responsibilities under LGPD, but it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or whether authentication is required. It lacks explicit instructions on operational prerequisites.

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