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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true and destructive=false, so the mutation/safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description usefully adds the toggle semantics via enabled:false, but does not say whether existing card configuration is replaced or merged, nor what happens if neither whatsapp nor link is supplied.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core action first and the toggling and formatting caveats in parentheses. Dense but every clause carries information; no filler.

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 a 7-parameter mutation with nested objects and no output schema, the agent would still want clarity on how whatsapp and link interact and what 'disabling' preserves, but the description plus annotations otherwise give enough to call the tool safely and 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 only 29%, so the description must compensate and it partly does: it explains the E.164 phone format with an example and constrains link to https. However, it says nothing about title, text (the schema itself already documents light markdown), the optional labels, whatsapp.message, or showReplay.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: enables/disables the final CTA card with WhatsApp and/or link buttons. This is clearly distinct from the sibling `set_*` tools (set_theme, set_hubspot, set_lead_capture), though the description itself never draws that contrast.

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?

Usage is only implied: the parenthetical 'ou desliga com enabled:false' signals how to turn the card off, and 'e/ou' implies WhatsApp and link can be used independently. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of when to prefer this over other end-of-tour settings.

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