Listar cobranças Pix Automático

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description reinforces that charges are not modified, but it does not add details about pagination, rate limits, or other behavioral aspects beyond what annotations provide.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 annotations (readOnly, idempotent) and an output schema, the description is mostly complete for a list tool. It lacks explicit mention of pagination behavior, but the schema includes pagination parameters, mitigating the gap.

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 each parameter described. The description does not add extra meaning to specific parameters beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents parameters adequately.

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 lists charges associated with Pix Automático recurrences using filters, specifying the verb 'list' and resource. It provides use cases (monitoring and reconciliation) but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling list tools like pix_list_charges or pix_list_due_charges.

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 advises using the tool for monitoring and reconciliation without modifying charges, implying a read-only use case. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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