create_pix_charge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions that a QR code is returned, but it does not disclose side effects (e.g., idempotency, rate limits, required authentication), or any destructive potential inherent in creating a charge. The description is insufficient for a tool with no 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 extremely concise: two sentences that state the purpose and key output. It is front-loaded and contains no filler. Every word is meaningful and earns its place, making it easy for an AI agent to quickly understand the tool's function.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description must explain the return value. It mentions the QR code but does not describe the overall charge object returned (e.g., charge ID, status). Given the tool creates a charge, additional details about the response structure would improve completeness, but the description covers the primary output.

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 schema description coverage at 67%, the baseline is 3. The description adds no information about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain the purpose of productId or customer, nor does it clarify the structure of the customer object. The schema covers most parameter details, so the description does not detract but also does not add value.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'PIX charge', which immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_boleto_charge that create a different payment method. It also specifies that it returns a QR code, adding valuable context about the tool's outcome.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_boleto_charge. It implies usage when a PIX charge is desired, but lacks guidance on prerequisites or situations where this tool should not be used. The name and context provide some differentiation, but explicit guidelines are missing.

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