Solicitar pagamento de código de barras

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds value by stating that the operation can move balance ('pode movimentar saldo') and implies the need for prior verification. No contradictions with annotations. Could mention more about failure modes or idempotency, but sufficient.

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 two concise sentences: first states purpose, second provides crucial usage warning. No unnecessary words, front-loaded. Efficiently communicates essential information.

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 presence of output schema and detailed annotations, the description covers key behavioral aspects (destructive, needs verification). It lacks explicit mention of idempotency or return structure, but overall adequate for a payment tool. Slight ambiguity in 'solicita pagamento' is clarified by balance warning.

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 100%, with all parameters adequately described in the input schema (e.g., 'codBarras', 'valor'). The tool description does not add additional parameter context beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate per scoring guidelines.

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 'Solicita o pagamento de uma conta identificada por código de barras', specifying the verb (solicitar pagamento) and resource (conta com código de barras). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'pay_detail_bar_code' which only details, and the warning adds context.

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 includes explicit usage guidance: 'Use somente depois de consultar e conferir os dados do título, pois a operação pode movimentar saldo.' This tells when to use (after consulting bill data) and warns about side effects. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, so not a 5.

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