Editar Cartão de Crédito

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds 'Operação de escrita' and 'Exige confirm: true', which clarifies the operation type and a required behavioral condition. However, it does not elaborate on the extent of changes or side effects, such as whether fields are overwritten partially or fully.

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 only two sentences, front-loading the operation type and core requirement. Every sentence adds essential information with 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?

Given the tool has 10 parameters, low schema coverage, and a destructive hint, the description is incomplete. It fails to describe the update semantics (partial vs. full), return value (output schema exists but not mentioned), or prerequisites beyond the confirm flag. The agent lacks sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 only 10%, with only the 'id' parameter described. The description itself only adds context about the 'confirm' parameter (must be true). For the remaining 9 parameters, no additional meaning is provided, leaving significant gaps in understanding.

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 'Edita um cartão de crédito manual do Despezzas', specifying the verb (editar) and resource (cartão de crédito manual). It distinguishes the tool from sibling update tools that target different resources (e.g., accounts, transactions).

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 says 'Exige confirm: true', giving a specific requirement for using the tool. However, it does not provide when-to-use guidance compared to alternatives, such as when to use update vs. create or delete. The usage context is implied but not explicitly differentiated.

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