Indicadores de riesgo y oportunidad de una subasta: alertas (cargas elevadas, deuda subsistente TGSS, vivienda habitual...) y señales positivas. Consultar SIEMPRE antes de recomendar una subasta.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bien_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool provides alerts and positive signals, and lists example alert types (cargas elevadas, deuda TGSS, vivienda habitual). However, it does not explicitly state whether this is a read-only operation or mention any permissions or side effects, leaving some behavioral gaps.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a critical usage instruction. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary verbosity.
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 tool with only one parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and gives practical usage guidance. It provides examples of the indicators but doesn't detail the output structure or error behavior, which is a minor gap. Overall, it is adequate for the tool's simplicity.
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 input schema has one parameter, bien_id, but the description does not mention or explain it. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate by defining what bien_id refers to, but it does not. The parameter is only self-evident from its name and type, which is not sufficient.
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 provides risk and opportunity indicators for an auction, with specific examples of alerts and positive signals. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like detalle_inmueble or costes_totales by focusing on auction risk assessment.
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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'Consultar SIEMPRE antes de recomendar una subasta' (always consult before recommending an auction). This is clear when-to-use context. However, it does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it doesn't fully meet the highest bar for explicit alternatives.
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.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: searching, comparing, viewing details, estimating costs, assessing risk, finding similar properties, and viewing inventory stats. There is no overlap or ambiguity between tool functions.
All names use lowercase with underscores, but the pattern is mixed: some are verb-led (buscar_inmuebles, comparar_inmuebles) while others are noun-led (costes_totales, detalle_inmueble, resumen_riesgo, stats_inventario). The use of 'stats' (English) in an otherwise Spanish set also detracts from consistency.
Seven tools is well within the ideal range for a domain-specific read-only server. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the auction-searching workflow, with no redundancy or unnecessary additions.
For an informational public-auction tool, the surface is complete: search, detail, comparison, cost estimation, risk analysis, similar items, and global statistics. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for the stated purpose.