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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context by enumerating the payload (beneficiarios, importes, plazos, requisitos, enlace) and warning that the data should be checked before asserting a requirement or date – meaningful for a tool with no output schema.

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 tight sentences: content first, usage second, front-loaded and free of filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the field enumeration and the warning about verifying requirements/dates do useful work. Given the read-only annotations and single well-documented parameter, the definition is nearly complete; only minor details (e.g., what happens if the code is not found) are absent.

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 100% and the single parameter is fully documented (pattern, example, source). The description only reinforces the meaning ('por su código BDNS') without adding syntax or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Ficha completa de una convocatoria') plus its key (BDNS code) and enumerates the returned content (beneficiarios, importes, plazos, requisitos, enlace). This clearly separates it from the buscar_* search siblings, which list rather than retrieve a full record.

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?

'Úsala después de buscar, antes de afirmar un requisito o una fecha' gives explicit sequencing and purpose, effectively pointing at the buscar_* tools as the prerequisite step. It stops short of naming a specific sibling or stating exclusions, so it is not a full 5.

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