Listar cobranças Pix imediatas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description reinforces read-only behavior but adds no further behavioral context beyond that. Given the annotations, this is adequate.

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: the first states what the tool does, the second recommends when to use it. Every word is meaningful, with no 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?

For a list tool with a full input schema and output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and usage. It could mention pagination or output format, but the schema and annotations suffice.

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%, so each parameter is already described in the input schema. The description adds high-level context about filters and period but no extra detail beyond the schema, making the contribution marginal.

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 states exactly what the tool does: list immediate Pix charges with period and filters. The title 'Listar cobranças Pix imediatas' matches the name and clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 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 explicitly recommends use in monitoring and reconciliation routines and emphasizes that records are not altered, providing clear context. While it doesn't list alternatives, the purpose is well-defined.

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