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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by explaining the conditional behavior (gap calculation only when sueldo_neto_mensual is provided). No contradictions. Could mention output structure but sufficient.

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 with purpose and examples, uses bold for key terms, and is concisely structured. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information. Appropriate length for the tool's complexity.

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 no output schema, the description adequately conveys that the tool estimates pension and calculates the gap and necessary savings. It lacks explicit mention of output format, but the integrated analysis is clearly described. Sufficient for agent understanding.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds beyond schema by explaining that sueldo_neto_mensual triggers the gap calculation and provides an alternative interpretation for base_cotizacion_mensual ('o el salario bruto mensual actual como aproximación'). This helps agents understand parameter usage beyond raw schema.

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's purpose with specific examples ('qué pensión me quedará', 'cuánto cobraré al jubilarme') and distinguishes it from sibling tools by explicitly prioritizing it over calcular_pension_publica and calcular_brecha_jubilacion.

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 instructs when to use this tool ('cualquier pregunta sobre pensión, jubilación o cuánto cobraré al jubilarme debe resolverse con consulta_jubilacion') and when not to (avoid using separate tools). Provides clear alternative guidance.

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