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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method 'GET' and clarifies that the tool reads a global system configuration value, which is useful context about what the operation accesses, though it does not discuss authentication, response behavior, or limitations.

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 compact sentence with no filler or repetition. The verb, resource, scope, and endpoint are all present and front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 no output schema and two fully undocumented parameters, the description leaves important invocation details unknown. It does not describe return values, the meaning of query/account, or how this tool relates to sibling configuration tools, so an agent has insufficient context for a confident call.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of the 'query' or 'account' parameters. An agent cannot infer their meaning, format, or whether they are required from either the schema or the description.

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 action ('Listar o valor de uma configuração global do sistema') and the resource plus endpoint ('GET /ini/config'). It identifies the domain ('Condomínios') but does not explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling config-related tools such as superlogica_configuracoes_list or superlogica_ini_postconfig.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of exclusions. The description implies it is used to read a global configuration value, but it never explains the intended selection context relative to other config list/create tools.

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