Consultar cobrança Pix imediata

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

The description adds that the tool is for accompaniment without modification, complementing the readOnlyHint annotation. No contradictions; behavioral traits are transparent and consistent.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no redundancy. Every word adds value; it is concise and efficient.

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 readOnlyHint and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential use case. It specifies the charge type (imediata) which is important among many Pix charge siblings. Could mention prerequisites (e.g., charge must exist) but not critical.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains txid and revisao. The description adds that it retrieves data, revision, and state, which adds marginal value but does not go beyond schema details.

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 consults by txid the data, revision, and state of an immediate Pix charge. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'imediata' and emphasizing no modification, which aligns with readOnlyHint.

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 says to use it to monitor payment or removal without modifying, providing clear context. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the sibling list offers many creation/update tools that would be used instead for modifications.

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