chequear_recallVerifica si un medicamento o producto tiene un recall activo de la FDA, con razón en español cuando existe. Data federal actualizada a diario. Cobertura: Estados Unidos y Puerto Rico.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| medicamento | Yes | Nombre del medicamento o producto (ej: "metformin") |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context beyond the schema, such as data being updated daily, coverage area, and that the reason is provided in Spanish when it exists. This gives the agent a good sense of what to expect, though it does not explicitly state output structure or behavior when no recall is found.
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 concise—two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds relevant context (data update and coverage). Every sentence contributes meaning, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.
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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete. It explains what the tool verifies, the output characteristic (reason in Spanish when it exists), data freshness, and coverage. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
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 100% with the parameter 'medicamento' having an example ('metformin'). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond what is already in the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 with a specific verb ('Verifica') and resource ('medicamento o producto tiene un recall activo de la FDA'). It also provides scope (Estados Unidos y Puerto Rico) and is clearly distinct from sibling tools, which focus on unrelated topics like business search and local demand.
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 usage context by stating the data source (FDA), update frequency (diaria), and geographic coverage (Estados Unidos y Puerto Rico). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for a simple lookup tool.
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 targets a distinct resource or workflow: local businesses, recalls, provider directories, public records, events, demand, verification stats, and citations. The only mild concern is that citar, dato_citable, and buscar_negocio could be briefly confused by name alone, but their descriptions clearly separate them.
All names are lowercase snake_case and mostly Spanish, so they feel cohesive. However, conventions vary: buscar_negocio and chequear_recall are verb-noun, directorio_plan_medico and eventos_proximos are noun-noun or noun-adjective, while lo_que_no_se is a complete phrase. This is readable but not a uniform verb_noun pattern.
Ten tools is well within the ideal range, and each one addresses a distinct part of the server's mission: business search, verification, citations, health provider coverage, recalls, events, and demand/unknown signals. Nothing feels redundant or unnecessary.
The tool surface covers the key workflows well: search, cite, verify, check health access, find events, check leads, and surface unmet demand. Minor gaps exist — for example, business details are limited to the west PR focus and certain plans only — but those are clearly scoped limitations rather than missing core functions.