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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations, the description discloses important behavioral and operational traits: payment per query with prepaid credit, no platform credentials required, data source is official and not confidential, and LGPD compliance responsibility. This goes well beyond what annotations already state.

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 only three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. The legal and payment details are relevant but slightly lengthen the text; still, each sentence carries essential information and adds value.

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?

Despite good purpose and transparency, the description omits critical invocation details: no parameter guidance, no clarification of return values or certificate format, and no indication which identifiers are expected. With no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool reliably.

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 does not explain the cpf, cnpj, or nome parameters. It fails to communicate whether any of these are required, how they should be formatted, or how they are used in the query. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 identifies the tool as a query ('consulta') for the CEAT certificate from TRT19 official source, distinguishing it from generic sibling tools like authenticate or marketplace. The verb and resource are specific and immediately understandable.

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 clear context: it queries official Brazilian sources, is hosted on the platform, requires prepaid credits, and does not need platform credentials. It does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives, but there are no close sibling query tools, and the context strongly implies its intended use.

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