Desvincular split de cobrança Pix imediata

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the operation modifies the split link and advises to verify charge state, but does not elaborate on what exactly changes or any side effects. It is adequate but not rich 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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the purpose and usage guidance. Could potentially combine the caution into the first sentence, but it's very concise.

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 simple one-parameter structure, the presence of an output schema, and annotations covering idempotency and destructiveness, the description is sufficiently complete. It clarifies the scope (immediate charge) and provides a usage note. 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?

The input schema covers the single parameter txid with a description ('Identificador da cobrança Pix'). The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 action: remove the split link from an immediate Pix charge. It uses a specific verb-reource pair and distinguishes from siblings like pix_split_unlink_due_charge (due charge) and pix_split_link_charge (link operation). The title also reinforces the scope.

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 when to use ('when the receipt should no longer follow that distribution') and includes a caution to check the charge state before changing. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context of split operations implies the opposite (linking). Good practical guidance.

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