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

The description contradicts the annotations. It explicitly says 'Prepara a acao, sem executa-la' (prepares the action without executing it), while the annotations declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. If the tool does not execute the action, destructive behavior is inconsistent with the stated behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then structured into workflow, security, and result-handling instructions. Most sentences earn their place, though it is somewhat dense for the amount of information provided.

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 authentication, preparation-vs-execution workflow, and long-result handling, but with 14 undocumented parameters and no output schema, it leaves critical invocation details unspecified. The contradiction with the destructive annotation further undermines completeness.

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?

There are 14 parameters and schema description coverage is 0%. The description provides no meaning for any parameter beyond saying the fields follow the API contract and not to pass credentials. It does not compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation, leaving the required itemSelecionadoId and all other fields semantically opaque.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Adicionar voo ao carrinho,' and adds the crucial scope that it only prepares the action, not executes it. This distinguishes it from siblings like gover_adicionar_hotel_carrinho and gover_adicionar_veiculo_carrinho by resource, and from gover_confirmar_operacao by workflow stage.

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?

It gives explicit workflow guidance: show parameters to the user and only after explicit confirmation use gover_confirmar_operacao. It also names the alternative tool for long results (gover_ler_resultado) and states the authentication constraint.

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