Configurar webhook de cobranças Pix Automático

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate that it modifies state. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the fact that it configures a webhook. It could mention overwriting behavior or authentication requirements, but given annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentences that are front-loaded with the purpose and include a usage hint. Every word is essential, no fluff. Excellent conciseness.

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 simple input (one parameter) and existence of an output schema (not shown), the description is fairly complete. It could explain what happens if the webhook URL already exists or how to manage multiple endpoints, but for this tool it is adequate. Context signals show it's among many siblings, so clarity is important.

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 one parameter (webhookUrl) having a clear description. The tool description repeats that the URL receives events, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is correct.

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 (configures), the resource (webhook URL for Pix Automático charges), and additional context. It specifies the exact purpose and differentiates from sibling tools like pix_config_webhook by targeting Pix Automático specifically.

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 provides a clear usage context: 'Use depois de preparar o callback seguro para acompanhar tentativas e pagamentos recorrentes.' It tells the user when to use it (after preparing a secure callback), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Still, it offers good guidance.

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