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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a key side-effect boundary: it does not touch existing appointments and instead asks the owner to decide on cancellation. It still doesn't state permission/auth requirements beyond 'DUEÑO', nor whether re-closing an already-closed hour is idempotent.

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?

Front-loads the owner scope, then usage examples, then edge-case behavior in three tight paragraphs. Slightly verbose, but every sentence adds operational information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the side-effect on existing bookings is covered. The remaining gap is that three of five parameters lack any semantic explanation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'desde'/'hasta' format and that omitting 'hasta' closes a single hour, but leaves 'negocio', 'clave', and 'fecha' (including date format) entirely undocumented.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('cerrar horas') scoped to the business owner, and the phrase 'para que nadie se las pueda agendar' explains the effect. It is clearly the inverse of the sibling abrir_horas.

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?

Gives explicit trigger phrases ('tápame mañana de 2 a 4', 'no voy a estar el jueves'), the format for 'desde'/'hasta' (24h), and the rule for the full-day case (use business open/close hours). Nothing about when to invoke is left to inference.

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