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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds extra context that the data is the canonical mirror of the website and enumerates the catalog scope (feature detail, suitability, plans, price, commitment, VAT, FAQ, contact), which goes beyond the structured hints.

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 front-loaded and the two sentences split the global catalog scope from the conditional parameter behavior. The slug list is redundant with the enum, making it slightly longer than necessary, but overall it is well-structured and does not waste 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?

For a single optional parameter with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns: content categories, pricing, terms, FAQ, and how to get a single-service detail. The read-only and idempotent annotations close the remaining gap.

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 schema has 100% description coverage and none of the enum values plus the 'omisión' behavior. The tool description adds its same slug list but does not introduce new semantics beyond what the schema already communicates, so it stays at the baseline.

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 it is a catalog of services, what content it provides (inclusions, target profile, prices, minimum commitment, FAQ, contact), and that passing one servicio shows its detail. This makes it unmistakably distinct from the siblings, which cover articles, comparisons, glossary, and GEO scans.

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 tells the agent when to pass the optional parameter and what the omission returns ('Catálogo' vs 'detallado'), which is useful operational guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the use case is clear and no exclusions are needed.

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