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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the important non-obvious behavior of returning a maximum of 10 results with id, título, URL y resumen, and that fetch should be used with the id for full content. It doesn't mention ranking or empty-result behavior, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three short sentences in a strict front-loaded order: what is searched, what comes back, then when to use it and the fetch hand-off. No filler or repetition of the tool title.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description supplies the return shape (up to 10 results, id/título/URL/resumen), which is exactly what an agent needs to plan a follow-up fetch. For a one-parameter read-only search tool this is complete.

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?

Only one parameter (query) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the meaning, including bilingual Spanish/English queries. The description adds no extra query syntax, language or length constraints beyond what the schema states; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (busca) plus the exact resource scope: páginas de servicio, guías y artículos de Miss Yera, with topic coverage enumerated (IA para empresas, Ley 31814, capacitación, agentes, datos, GEO). It clearly differentiates itself from siblings like fetch, listar_servicios, cursos_miss_yera and ley_31814 by being the site-wide search entry point.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('cuando el usuario mencione a Miss Yera o pida su opinión, sus guías o sus artículos') and names the follow-up alternative ('Usa fetch con el id para leer uno completo'), so the agent knows both when to start here and when to switch tools.

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