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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: weekly observation from SIO, units (ARS/kg live weight), a warning for fewer than 200 heads, and that omitting the parameter returns all categories. No contradictions with annotations.

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 paragraph that efficiently conveys all necessary information. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential details. While it's compact, it could be slightly more structured with bullet points or clearer separation of concepts. Nonetheless, it earns its sentences without waste.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the return values (price, heads, warning), source (SIO, weekly), and unit (ARS/kg). Given the context of good annotations, no additional information is needed.

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 single parameter 'categoria' has an enum but no schema description. The description adds meaning by stating 'categoria (enum) filtra una; sin arg, todas.' This explains that the parameter filters to one category or returns all if omitted, significantly adding value beyond the enum list.

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 provides livestock prices by category from Mercado Agroganadero, including specific details like weekly observation, ARS/kg live weight, current price, heads, and a warning for low data. It distinguishes itself from siblings such as get_indice_novillo and get_precios_detallados, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool (for category-level prices) and when not to use it (not for INMAG daily index or subcategories). It also clarifies that the optional categoria parameter filters a single category, and omitting it returns all categories. This provides clear usage context and distinctions from alternatives.

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