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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond this: cost implications (prepaid credit), no credential requirement, non-confidential nature, and LGPD compliance responsibilities. It doesn't mention rate limits or failure modes, but the added info is meaningful.

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 of four sentences, each carrying relevant information (official source, payment model, data nature, legal responsibility). No redundancy, but could be slightly better structured with bullets for readability.

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?

For a read-only query tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers key aspects like cost and data sensitivity. However, it lacks parameter format and return value expectations, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional 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?

With schema coverage of 0% and only one parameter 'selo', the description fails to explain what format or value 'selo' expects (e.g., a code, a string pattern). The agent has no guidance on how to construct a valid query, which is a significant gap.

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 queries a digital seal (Selo Digital) from the TJSP court in an official source. The verb 'consulta' (query) and resource are specific, and it's distinct from sibling tools like 'authenticate' or 'marketplace'.

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 explains the operational context (no platform credentials, prepaid credit per query, official source) but doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over other tools. However, given the specialized nature and lack of alternatives, this is sufficiently clear.

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