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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it discloses the account/permission scoping, forbids passing credentials, and reveals a pagination/truncation workflow (resultadoId -> gover_ler_resultado).

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, but the body is a grab-bag of boilerplate (credential warnings, payment data portal note) that dilutes the operative content. Several sentences are generic policy statements rather than task-specific guidance.

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?

Annotations cover the safety profile and the description covers the pagination workflow, but with no output schema and 7 fully undocumented parameters the agent still lacks enough to call it correctly or interpret the status response.

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?

All 7 parameters have 0% schema description coverage, and the description offers only the vacuous statement that fields follow the API contract. None of termo, cidadeId, clientId, unidadeId, funcionarioId, tipoCentroDeCusto, or finalidadeViagemId is explained, leaving the caller with no semantic 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 states a specific verb+resource: checking the status of a price comparison. It is clearly distinguishable from adjacent siblings like gover_solicitar_comparativo_precos (request) and gover_ler_resultado (read results), though it does not explicitly name them in the purpose statement.

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 conditional routing rule: for extensive results, use gover_ler_resultado with the returned resultadoId. However, it never states when to call this tool versus requesting a new comparison or saving one, so the broader usage context is only implied.

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