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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses important behavioral details: it requires login, will not create if client mode is not activated, and will indicate failure in that case. It also explains that the descripcion is stored as context for future use. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the minimal annotations.

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 front-loaded with the action, uses clear Spanish, and includes necessary context (purpose, parameter roles, prerequisites, failure condition) in a compact form. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 simple create tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it states what it does, what inputs are needed, how the optional input matters, and the conditions that could prevent execution. There are no significant gaps that would hinder 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 covers both parameters with examples and descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds value by emphasizing that descripcion will be used later to decide which entries are of interest, reinforcing why it is worth filling in. This extra functional context goes beyond the schema's structural documentation.

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 'Crea un nuevo cliente (empresa u organización)' which is a specific verb+resource action. It distinguishes from siblings like editar_cliente and listar_clientes by explicitly indicating it creates a new client, and it explains the purpose ('para poder archivar entradas bajo él'), so an agent can easily select it when a new client is needed.

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 creating a new client and gives a precondition (client mode must be activated, otherwise it will fail). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like editar_cliente for existing clients. The guidance is present but not exhaustive.

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