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

Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent hints. The description adds valuable context: payment model (prepaid credits), no credentials needed, data is not confidential, and LGPD responsibility. This goes beyond the annotations.

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, reasonably concise, and clearly states the purpose first. It includes extra info (payment, LGPD) but is not overly verbose.

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 there is no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description should clarify expected inputs (CPF/CNPJ) and outputs. It only gives generic info about official sources and payment. This is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 has 2 params (cpf, cnpj) with no descriptions, and the description does not mention them or explain their roles. It fails to add meaning beyond the schema; the tool's purpose implies CPF/CNPJ, but the description never says so.

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 specifies the tool's function: a query to official Brazilian sources about slave labor ('Trabalho Escravo'). The verb 'consulta' and specific subject matter make the purpose unambiguous, and it distinguishes from siblings which are generic platform tools.

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 context (official source, paid per query, no platform credentials) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, there are no overlapping siblings, so the guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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