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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation through 'Muestra' (shows) but does not explicitly state that it makes no changes or disclose any limitations (e.g., what happens if the business is not found). It also doesn't mention auth requirements or rate limits. The description states what data is shown, which adds some transparency, but it lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by the input note. Every word earns its place; there is no verbosity or redundancy.

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 required parameter and an output schema, the description fully covers what it does and how to invoke it. The output schema handles return value details, so the description's focus on purpose and input is complete. No critical context is missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that the 'negocio' parameter accepts an ID or part of the name, which is not evident from the schema alone. It also clarifies that the parameter identifies the business. However, it doesn't specify format or length, but given the simple single-parameter design, this is adequate.

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 function: 'Muestra los servicios, precios, horario, dirección y cómo llegar a un negocio' (shows services, prices, schedule, address, and how to get to a business). It specifies the resource (a business) and the exact data returned, distinguishing it from siblings like listar_negocios which lists businesses rather than showing details.

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 provides clear context: use this when you need detailed service information for a specific business. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is unambiguous. The input instruction 'Acepta el id o parte del nombre' gives practical usage guidance.

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