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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces these by stating it accesses public information. It adds meaningful behavioral context: no credentials needed, per-query prepaid pricing, and LGPD compliance responsibilities, which go 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 concise three-sentence paragraph that front-loads the primary purpose, then adds essential operational and legal context. Every sentence provides value without redundant or filler content.

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 the tool's purpose, input types, payment model, and data classification. It does not explicitly describe the return value or error handling, but the nature of the tool (issuing a certificate) makes the output largely implicit. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward read operation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains that CPF and CNPJ are the identifiers used to query the certificate, but it does not clarify the 'completo' boolean parameter or provide formatting requirements. The description partially covers the two required parameters but leaves the optional one undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb 'Emite' (issues) and clearly identifies the resource: the Certidão Negativa de Débitos Trabalhistas (CNDT) from TST. It specifies the input types (CPF/CNPJ) and scope (person or company), making it distinct from the platform-level sibling tools like authenticate and 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 provides clear context for use: this tool queries public data using CPF/CNPJ and requires prepaid credit. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the operational context and input requirements are clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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