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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no extra behavioral details (e.g., whether results are sorted, paginated, or account-scoped). It simply restates what the operation does without enriching the annotation context.

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 a single, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core function. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary 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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is minimal but leaves gaps: what does 'account' refer to? Is it required? Are there any assumptions about the account context? The lack of any explanation about the parameter or response structure reduces completeness.

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 has one optional parameter 'account' with no description. The tool description says 'from the account' but does not explain what the account parameter is, its format, or its optionality. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter clarity.

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 is in Portuguese: 'Lista todas as labels da conta.' which translates to 'Lists all labels from the account.' It clearly states the action (lists) and the resource (labels), and distinguishes this from sibling tools like keep_create_label and keep_delete_label.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when it is appropriate to call this tool, nor does it provide exclusions or contrast with related listing tools. The purpose is implied but not explicitly framed.

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