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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds that it is hosted by the platform, requires no platform credentials, is paid via prepaid credit, and that the client is responsible for LGPD compliance. This goes beyond the annotations by disclosing cost and data responsibility, though it does not describe the return format.

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 three sentences and front-loads the main purpose, but includes legal disclaimers and platform details that may be extraneous for invocation. It is not overly long, but could be trimmed to be more concise without losing essential information.

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 covers purpose, cost, and compliance, but lacks parameter semantics and expected output. Given the lack of an output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficiently complete for full agent understanding, though the simple nature of the tool partially compensates.

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 description does not mention any parameters (cpf, cnpj, nome) nor clarify their usage or formats. The schema has no descriptions (coverage 0%), and the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to rely solely on parameter names without additional guidance.

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 performs a consultation (consulta) for a Certidão Eletrônica de Ações Trabalhistas (CEAT) from Tribunal TRT2, specifically for physical processes, from an official source. The verb and resource are explicit, and no sibling tools are similar, making it unambiguous.

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 on when to use: it is a paid query on official Brazilian sources and notes it is not confidential. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives; given the siblings are unrelated platform tools, the guidance is adequate but not exhaustive.

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