Calcula la edad exacta en años, meses y días a partir de una fecha de nacimiento. Indica también el total de días vividos y cuándo es el próximo cumpleaños.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| fechaNacimiento | Yes | Fecha de nacimiento en formato YYYY-MM-DD (ej: 1990-05-15) | |
| fechaReferencia | No | Fecha en la que calcular la edad en formato YYYY-MM-DD o "hoy". Por defecto hoy. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating no side effects. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the computed outputs (total days lived, next birthday) beyond mere reading. This enriches the agent's understanding of what the tool returns.
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 primary purpose. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy or fluff. It is concise yet informative.
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 lack of an output schema, the description adequately outlines expected return values (years, months, days, total days, next birthday). It covers both input parameters implicitly. However, edge cases (e.g., invalid dates, future birth dates) are not addressed, which slightly limits completeness.
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%, with both parameters having clear descriptions in the schema (format and default). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond referencing 'fecha de nacimiento'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance or expand on 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 uses a specific verb ('calcula') and clearly identifies the resource ('edad exacta en años, meses y días'), along with additional outputs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calcular_diferencia_fechas by focusing specifically on age calculation from a birth date.
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 implies usage for calculating age from a birth date but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., calcular_diferencia_fechas for date difference, convertir_edad_mascota for pet age). No exclusion criteria or alternative recommendations are given.
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.
Most tools are cleanly separated by domain and purpose, but a few close pairs exist: calcular_camara_lenta and calcular_regla_180_video both touch the 180° shutter rule, and calcular_pace_running and calcular_prediccion_running both produce race projections. The descriptions are detailed enough to resolve the ambiguity, but misselection is possible if they are not read carefully.
All tool names follow a consistent Spanish verb_noun snake_case pattern, with calcular_ dominating and the other verbs (convertir_, consultar_, recomendar_, escalar_) used for genuinely different action types. There is no mixed casing or style inconsistency.
42 tools is far above the 25+ threshold and the set spans many unrelated domains such as cooking, fitness, photography, vehicles, dates, and finance. While each individual calculator may be useful, the server is not well-scoped and would be much easier to navigate if split into domain-specific MCP servers.
Coverage inside each sub-domain is quite thorough, but there are notable gaps: calcular_kilometraje references calcular_irpf, calcular_cuota_autonomo, and comparar_autonomo_vs_sl, none of which exist in this server. These dangling cross-references can lead an agent to attempt calling unavailable tools.
