Consultar devolução de Pix

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds that the tool is for 'Pix recebido' (received Pix) and that it does not create or move values. This complements the annotations with domain-specific context.

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, first sentence states purpose, second gives usage and behavioral guidance. Front-loaded, no superfluous 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?

The description covers purpose, usage scope (received Pix, existing devolution), and safety (read-only, no creation). Output schema exists but is not needed for the description to be complete. No gaps.

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 descriptions for e2eId and id. The tool description does not add further semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Consulta o estado e os dados de uma devolução já solicitada para um Pix recebido', with specific verb 'consulta' and resource 'devolução já solicitada'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pix_devolution by specifying it queries an existing return rather than creating one.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use para acompanhar seu processamento sem criar outra devolução ou movimentar valores', providing clear context for when to use (monitoring) and when not to (creating). Does not name alternatives directly, but the sibling pix_devolution is implied from the contrast.

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