Consultar cobrança Pix Automático

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description's statement 'sem alterar a cobrança' aligns and adds context about output (agenda, tentativas, estado). This adds value 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, front-loaded with the action and resource, no unnecessary words. Perfect structure.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, usage, and non-destructive behavior. No missing critical information.

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 parameter 'txid' described as 'Identificador da cobrança Pix.' The description mentions 'txid' but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 it queries a charge by txid associated with a Pix Automático recurrence, specifying the resource (charge with recurrence) and action (consultar). It distinguishes from siblings by targeting automatic recurrence charges, unlike generic pix_detail_charge.

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 explicit usage context: monitoring schedule, attempts, status without altering. It implies read-only use, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like pix_detail_charge or pix_update_automatic_charge.

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