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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but it does not contradict them. Given the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate as the description is not misleading, though it adds little value.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently communicates the main functionality.

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 simple get-by-id tool, the description is adequately complete, but it omits the purpose of the 'account' parameter and does not clarify the return format (e.g., whether it returns an array for multiple IDs). Given the lack of schema descriptions, some additional context would be helpful.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'ids' and clarifies it accepts a list, but it does not explain the 'account' parameter at all. Since there is no schema description, the failure to explain 'account' leaves a significant gap in param semantics.

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's purpose: it details SQL warehouses by ID, using the verb 'Detalha' (details) and specifies the resource (SQL warehouses). It distinguishes from list_warehouses, but could be more explicit about the contrast. It gives enough specificity to understand it's a get-by-id operation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like databricks_list_warehouses. The description only says what it does, not when to use it or when not to. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or alternative tools.

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