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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context: default and max for results, clarification that it does not provide market activity, and specifics about returned fields. No contradictions.

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 concise with no fluff. It front-loads the main purpose, provides essential usage details, and ends with a clear exclusion. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description thoroughly describes what is returned (nombre, localidad/provincia, categoría, CUIT, contacto, perfil). With 3 well-explained parameters and clear behavior, the tool is fully specified for correct invocation.

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%, but the description adds constraints not in schema: minimum query length (2 chars), default for limite (8), maximum (25). Also clarifies that provincia is optional.

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 uses a specific verb ('Buscar' meaning search) and resource ('Directorio de consignatarias/casas de remate'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling 'actividad_consignatarias' by stating what it does not do (market activity).

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 states when to use (search directory) and when not (for market activity, use actividad_consignatarias). Also includes minimum query length (2 chars) and default/max for limite.

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