Criar recorrência de Pix Automático

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

Annotations indicate it's not read-only and not destructive. The description adds that the recurrence must be authorized by the payer ('deverá ser autorizada pelo pagador'), which is important behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't detail the post-creation flow or return value.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and immediately follows with usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 objects, many parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimal. It hints at the authorization requirement but doesn't explain the overall process or expected outcomes, leaving gaps for a multi-step flow.

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?

Despite 100% schema description coverage, most descriptions are tautological (e.g., 'Valor do campo “valor Rec” usado na entrada da operação'), adding little meaning beyond field names. Only a few descriptions (e.g., 'calendario' as 'Regras de calendário e vencimento') provide actual semantics.

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 'Cria' (creates) and the resource 'recorrência' for Pix Automático, specifying it requires payer authorization. It distinguishes from siblings like update or detail by noting it's used at the start of the recurring agreement journey.

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 explicitly says 'Use no início da jornada de contratação do acordo recorrente' (use at the beginning of the hiring journey), providing clear context. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but given sibling tools like pix_update_recurrence_automatic, the use case is implied.

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