Configurar webhook de recorrências Pix Automático

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by indicating that a secure callback must be prepared first and that the operation sets the notification destination. While annotations show destructiveHint: true, the description doesn't elaborate on consequences like overwriting existing webhook or reversibility.

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 consists of two concise, front-loaded sentences. The first states the primary purpose, and the second adds a prerequisite and confirms the action. No unnecessary words.

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 an output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers purpose and prerequisite. It could be improved by mentioning whether existing webhook configurations are replaced or what happens on failure, but the specificity of the resource type suffices.

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 clear descriptions for 'webhookUrl' (URI format). The description adds minimal extra meaning ('destino das notificações') but largely echoes the schema, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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: configuring the URL for Pix automatic recurrence webhook events. The verb 'Configura' and the specific resource 'webhook de recorrências Pix Automático' distinguish it from generic webhook tools like pix_config_webhook.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Use depois de preparar o callback seguro') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Usage context is implied by specifying the recurrence webhook type.

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