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 useful return-content detail (operationId, method, route, description) in the absence of an output schema, but says nothing about result volume, pagination, or whether the listing is exhaustive.

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 short clauses with the resource description front-loaded and the usage hint second; nothing is wasted. It is arguably terse for a tool whose output shape matters, but 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?

For a single-optional-parameter read-only listing with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and when to reach for it. Only the lack of any statement about result size or completeness keeps it from a 5.

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 tag parameter already carries examples ('Facturas', 'Webhooks', 'Invoices'). The description's 'por sección' merely restates the parameter's purpose without adding format or matching rules, 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource (list API operations) and enumerates what each entry contains (operationId, method, route, behavior), which is more than a restatement of the name. It also positions itself relative to describe_operation, though it does not distinguish itself from other read siblings like list_pages or search_docs.

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?

'Úsela para encontrar la ruta correcta antes de describe_operation' gives an explicit usage context and names the follow-up tool, forming a clear workflow. There are no explicit when-not conditions, but the intended sequencing is unambiguous.

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