obtener_detalle_localDevuelve el detalle (codigo, piso, area en m2 y proyecto) de un local comercial de EcoPlaza a partir de su codigo exacto, SOLO si actualmente esta disponible. Si el codigo no corresponde a un local disponible, sugiere usar buscar_locales_disponibles. NO incluye precios.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| codigo | Yes | Codigo exacto del local, ej: "P-14" o "B-21". |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context: it only returns results for available locals, and explicitly excludes price information. No contradictions with annotations.
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?
Extremely concise: three sentences covering purpose, failure behavior, and exclusions. No filler, every sentence is informative and front-loaded with key details.
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 enumerates returned fields (codigo, piso, area en m2 y proyecto) and notes absence of prices. This fully sets expectations for the call result.
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% (codigo has description, pattern, max/min length). The description adds value by explaining that the code must be exact and provides examples 'P-14' or 'B-21', which aids the agent in formatting input.
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 action ('Devuelve el detalle'), the resource ('local comercial'), and the condition ('SOLO si actualmente esta disponible'). It also differentiates from sibling tool 'buscar_locales_disponibles' by specifying when the tool fails.
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 tells when to use ('a partir de su codigo exacto') and when not to use ('Si el codigo no corresponde a un local disponible, sugiere usar buscar_locales_disponibles'). Also specifies what the tool does NOT include ('NO incluye precios').
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: searching available locations, consulting prices (referral), contacting advisor, listing projects, getting location details, and project info. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in Spanish (e.g., buscar_locales_disponibles, listar_proyectos). No mixing of conventions.
With 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for the domain of browsing and inquiring about commercial spaces. Each tool contributes meaningfully.
The tool surface covers the full workflow: discovering projects, searching locations, getting details, handling price inquiries (via referral), and contacting an advisor. No obvious gaps.