Definir forma de pagamento de uma cobrança

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true (mutation) and readOnlyHint=false. The description does not expand on behavioral traits such as whether the operation is reversible, what side effects occur, or any authorization requirements. It adds minimal value beyond 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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the key action. No wasted words. However, it could be structured with clearer separation of purpose and usage.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, nested schema, and many sibling tools, the description provides essential purpose and usage but lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., charge must exist in correct state) and side effects. Output schema likely covers return values.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter and subfield described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: associating a payment method and payer data with a previously created transaction. It specifies the context (second step of charge) and the output (generates payment instrument). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like define_subscription_pay_method or define_link_pay_method.

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 phrase 'Use para concluir a segunda etapa da cobrança' implies when to use it. However, no when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned. Siblings like define_link_pay_method exist for similar purposes but no guidance is provided.

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