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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), it adds real operational context: it uses only the connected Gover account and its API permissions, does not alter business records, credentials/identity must never be passed as arguments, and new payment data must only be entered in the Gover portal. That is meaningful auth and data-handling disclosure.

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?

Compact and front-loaded with the action first, then constraints, then the large-result routing tip. Each sentence carries information; no filler. Slight run-together of unrelated constraints keeps it from a 5.

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 an 8-parameter, zero-coverage search tool with no output schema, the description covers behavioral and routing aspects but leaves parameter meaning and required-field guidance entirely unaddressed, which an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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 8 parameters exist, so the description carries the burden — yet it only says 'fields follow the API contract' with no explanation of termo, opcaoId, cidadeId, clientId, unidadeId, funcionarioId, tipoCentroDeCusto, or finalidadeViagemId. It also omits that opcaoId is required.

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 clear verb+resource (search rooms and hotel rates) matching the title. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like gover_buscar_hoteis or gover_iniciar_pesquisa_hotel, leaving ambiguity in a dense hotel-search tool family.

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 one explicit routing instruction — for extensive results, use gover_ler_resultado with the returned resultadoId. But it offers no guidance on when to prefer this tool over gover_buscar_hoteis, gover_iniciar_pesquisa_hotel, or gover_consultar_hoteis_ofertados.

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