Excluir plano de assinatura

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description states 'remove sua configuração', which confirms destruction but adds no further behavioral details (e.g., effect on existing subscriptions). It is consistent but not additive 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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and include a usage hint. Every word contributes value; no fluff.

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 deletion tool, the description covers the core action and usage context. However, it does not mention what happens to subscriptions linked to the plan or any return value. Since an output schema exists (not shown), the return format may be documented there, so this is acceptable.

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 one required parameter 'id' described as 'Identificador do recurso.' The description does not add any semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without improvement.

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 'Exclui um plano de assinatura existente' which clearly identifies the verb (delete) and resource (plan). The conditional phrase 'quando a Efí permitir a remoção' slightly muddles clarity but still conveys the main purpose. Among sibling tools, this is distinct as the only plan deletion tool.

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 advises 'Use apenas se o plano não deve mais receber novas assinaturas', providing explicit context for when to use. However, it does not mention alternatives (e.g., update_plan) or when not to use it, leaving gaps in decision guidance.

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