Preparar Edição de Transação

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms it does not call the API ('sem chamar o Despezzas') and is a preview tool. This adds behavioral context beyond annotations and aligns with them.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with purpose. However, it lacks parameter detail which would improve usability; still concise enough.

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?

Despite an output schema, the description provides minimal context for a tool with 13 parameters. It explains the tool's role but not how to use the prepared payload or handle validation. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only 15% (only two parameters have descriptions), and the tool description adds no explanation of parameter meanings or usage. Given the large number of parameters (13) with low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 it is a preview helper ('Auxiliar de pré-visualização') that builds and validates the payload for editing a transaction without calling the Despezzas API. It distinguishes from sibling tools like despezzas_update_transaction and other prepare tools.

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 tells the agent to use this before despezzas_update_transaction ('Use antes de despezzas_update_transaction'), providing clear sequencing. No when-not stated but sibling context makes alternatives obvious.

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