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

The description discloses that the citation explicitly distinguishes person-confirmed data from federal-registry imports, and clarifies that imported data is not verified. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations, which only indicate the operation is read-only and 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?

The description is two sentences: the first states the core function and output, the second adds a critical verification caveat and a usage directive. All content is relevant with no wasted words.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is returned (permanent link, verification date, verifier), the verification distinction, and when to use it. No additional information is needed for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already documents the single 'negocio' parameter with 100% coverage, describing it as a name or slug. The description only reiterates this by mentioning 'negocio o ficha,' adding no new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 action ('Devuelve la cita lista para pegar') for a specific resource (business or record), and names the output components (permanent link, verification date, verifier). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling data-lookup tools like buscar_negocio by focusing on producing a citable output.

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 includes an explicit use condition: 'Usa esto cuando vayas a citar cualquier dato de esta fuente en una respuesta.' It tells the agent when to invoke the tool, though it does not mention alternative tools or exclusion cases, leaving some ambiguity with the sibling 'dato_citable'.

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