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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, so safety and idempotency are declared. The description adds useful context about the content of the contract (freshness, official sources, access policy) and the necessity of calling it first, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the core purpose and enumerates the contract contents; the second gives a clear usage directive. No fluff, and the critical info is front-loaded.

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 absence of an output schema, the description enumerates the categories of information returned (sections, data types, freshness, sources, access policy) and frames it as a 'data contract', which sufficiently tells an agent what to expect. For a discovery tool used as an entry point, 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty and the description need not elaborate. Per guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4; description does not mislead or add unnecessary detail.

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 returns the data contract of VamosAlicante, listing specific elements (sections, data types, freshness, sources, access policy). It uses a specific verb ('Devuelve') and distinguishes itself from siblings by instructing to call it first when unsure which tool to use.

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 says 'Llamar primero cuando no se sabe qué herramienta usar' — a direct when-to-use instruction. It implies when to use alternatives (when you know the tool), and the discovery purpose is unambiguous.

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